Weaponizing Law: How Israel Faces Legal Warfare on the Global Stage

This article is based on interviews conducted by V24 with various experts including Arsen Ostrovsky, an international human rights lawyer. Video coming soon.

Israel is now caught up in a new kind of battle; One that's fought in courtrooms and international meetings. 'Lawfare' - where laws that are meant to ensure fairness and accountability are sometimes used against countries to undermine their legitimacy or put pressure on them. In simple terms, lawfare is when legal systems are used not just for justice, but as a weapon to harm or delegitimize someone, or to stop them from using their own legal rights

A New Frontline of Conflict

Israel is fighting on many fronts, with lawfare playing a big role, says international human rights lawyer Arsen Ostrovsky. Unable to defeat Israel through force, Palestinian groups and their allies have turned to international bodies. They accuse Israel of war crimes, apartheid, and genocide. Ostrovsky believes this strategy aims to weaken Israel’s legitimacy while protecting groups like Hamas from responsibility.

A troubling example is the accusation of genocide. This charge comes from legal frameworks created to protect civilians and prevent atrocities like the Holocaust. Michal Kotler-Wunsch, Israel’s Special Envoy for Combating Antisemitism, calls these accusations a “perverted blood libel.” She points out the irony that the Genocide Convention, created after the Holocaust, is now being used against Israel, a state founded as a refuge for Jews.

Strategies of Lawfare

The legal campaign against Israel manifests in various forms, each strategically targeting the state’s global standing and constraining its actions. Ostrovsky identifies three key arenas in this conflict: the United Nations, the International Criminal Court (ICC), and the ICJ.

The UN, with its one-country, one-vote structure, has allowed anti-Israel majorities to wield disproportionate influence. Ostrovsky argues that bodies like the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) have become “pawns in the battle against Israel.” Agenda Item 7 of the UNHRC, a standing item focused solely on Israel, is a testament to this, making Israel the only country subject to perpetual review regardless of other global conflicts. According to Dan Fefferman, co-chairman of Sharaka, a coalition fostering relations between Israel and Arab countries, this dynamic is a “kabuki theater” of entrenched biases, where nations voting against Israel include dictatorships with their own histories of human rights abuses. Fefferman highlights the “structural problem” within the UN, where resolutions against Israel surpass those targeting egregious human rights abusers, illustrating a skewed focus.

International legal bodies have become similarly potent instruments in lawfare. At the ICC, Israeli leaders are facing potential arrest warrants and investigations for alleged war crimes, despite Israel’s non-signatory status to the Rome Statute. This tactic is designed to isolate Israel on the global stage by associating its leaders with the stigma of criminality. By equating Israel’s self-defense actions with crimes against humanity, the ICC dilutes distinctions between democracies and terrorist entities, a move that Ostrovsky finds “grotesque” and detrimental to the integrity of international law.

The ICJ, which issued a 2004 advisory opinion declaring Israel’s West Bank barrier unlawful, continues to serve as another battleground. In 2024, the ICJ issued an advisory opinion declaring Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories unlawful. And South Africa filed its complaint on 29 December 2023 accusing Israel of genocide, an escalation that Kotler-Wunsch views as a “perverse” distortion of historical memory.

The Role of NGOs and Economic Pressures

Economic lawfare represents yet another front, driven by NGOs and advocacy groups that challenge Israel through boycotts, divestment, and sanctions. The Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement, launched in 2005, has imposed significant economic pressures on Israel, targeting everything from products to cultural exchanges. In Europe, BDS campaigns have pressured governments and companies to adopt labeling laws and even boycott products from Israeli settlements, creating a chilling effect on Israel’s economy and image. By framing economic decisions as human rights imperatives, BDS and similar campaigns intensify Israel’s isolation, adding further strain to its diplomatic relations.

Gadi Taub, a historian and op-ed columnist, criticizes these efforts as tools wielded by an “elite” with little regard for the democratic processes in Israel. NGOs with international funding often pursue legal actions against Israeli policies in ways that bypass the will of Israeli citizens, creating an environment where external pressures, rather than internal debates, shape Israeli policies. This phenomenon underscores a broader issue within lawfare: the undermining of sovereign nations by external actors who sidestep democratic norms in favor of ideological outcomes.

The Erosion of Trust in International Institutions

Beyond the specific challenges Israel faces, lawfare reflects a troubling trend in the politicization of international legal frameworks. Ostrovsky argues that institutions meant to uphold justice are “crumbling to pieces,” eroding the very foundations of the rule of law. By failing to distinguish between democracies defending against terrorism and terrorist organizations themselves, these institutions betray their mandates, damaging their credibility in the eyes of the world.

Hilik Bar, a former Deputy Speaker of the Knesset, notes the hypocrisy inherent in decisions by bodies like the ICJ. While Israel is condemned for its security measures, the actions of groups such as Hamas receive little scrutiny, a disparity Bar argues is difficult to take seriously. This selective accountability, he suggests, ultimately harms the credibility of international institutions, as they become perceived as vehicles for political agendas rather than genuine justice.

Conclusion: Towards a Fairer International Legal Order

As lawfare continues to be waged against Israel, it raises fundamental questions about the future of international law. Can legal frameworks designed to promote peace and accountability fulfill their purpose if they are wielded as weapons in political conflicts? For Israel, this is not merely a rhetorical issue but an existential one that affects its right to self-defense and global standing.

International institutions have a responsibility to uphold justice impartially, not only for Israel but for all nations. The current trend toward lawfare undermines this mission, weakening the trust placed in these institutions and setting dangerous precedents for other democracies. A re-evaluation of the mechanisms and motivations driving lawfare is essential if international law is to be a true force for peace, rather than a battleground of political maneuvering.

Alexandra Audrey Tompson

Journalist | Lawyer (Admitted in New York; England & Wales)