We need to talk about Isaac

TetleysTLDR: The summary 

Isaac Herzog is coming to Britain this week.  He may be Israel’s ceremonial president, but in the war on Gaza he has been anything but symbolic. From the start, Herzog excused mass slaughter by declaring there were 'no innocent civilians' in Gaza, wiping out the very concept of civilian protection under international law. He has publicly backed the starvation siege, dismissed the International Court of Justice’s genocide ruling, and even scrawled his message of support on a bomb bound for Gaza. Herzog doesn’t give military orders, but he provides something just as dangerous: moral cover for war crimes and genocide. Under the Rome Statute, incitement to genocide is a crime in itself, and the UK has both the jurisdiction and obligation to act. When Herzog lands in London, he shouldn't be greeted with a red carpet, instead he should be arrested and sent to The Hague to answer for his complicity in mass murder.

TetleysTLDR: The article

Isaac Herzog is often described as a harmless figurehead, the ceremonial president who cuts ribbons and delivers platitudes while the real decisions are made by others. Don’t buy it. In the war on Gaza, Herzog has been one of Israel’s most poisonous mouthpieces. He’s the man who sneered that there are 'no innocent civilians' in Gaza, casually erasing the humanity of two million people.  He’s the man who toured military bases to cheer on the bombing campaign, who picked up a marker pen and scrawled his message on an artillery shell bound for a refugee camp.  Herzog might not push the button, but he gives the killers permission.  His role has been to dress up genocide in the language of 'defence',  to launder war crimes with the legitimacy of the presidential seal. H e is not a bystander.  He is an accomplice, a cheerleader, and a man with blood on his hands.

This Wednesday, Isaac Herzog touches down in Britain for 'ministerial talks'.   Let’s start by dealing with the fiction: Herzog is not an executive statesman.  He has no command of the Israeli Defence Forces, no power to appoint ministers, no say over policy.  The Israeli presidency is a ceremonial office, a gilded perch with little more than symbolic weight.  But symbolism matters, and the symbolism of Herzog’s visit is obscene.  By rolling out the red carpet for Herzog, Britain is not engaging in polite diplomacy.  It is conferring legitimacy on a man who has provided political and moral cover for some of the worst crimes of the 21st century. 

Herzog’s words and actions during Israel’s assault on Gaza in 2023–2025 did not merely reflect support for his country, they constituted incitement to genocide, justification for war crimes, and a brazen denial of international law.

_{Herzog’s Record of Incitement}

In October 2023, shortly after the Hamas attacks of 7 October, Herzog infamously declared:

“It is an entire nation out there that is responsible. It is not true this rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved. It’s absolutely not true.”

(Press conference, 13 October 2023, Office of the President of Israel)

That sentence stripped every man, woman, and child in Gaza of civilian status.  It was not an accident, not a slip of the tongue, but a deliberate reframing of international humanitarian law.  By erasing the category of civilian, Herzog gave licence to collective punishment: bombing homes, hospitals, schools, refugee camps and called it legitimate.

Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court:

• Article 25(3)(e) defines 'direct and public incitement to commit genocide' as a crime.
• Article 7 defines crimes against humanity, including persecution and extermination of civilians.
• Article 8(2)(b)(i) & (ii) prohibit intentional attacks on civilians and civilian objects.

Herzog’s statement explicitly undermined the distinction between combatant and civilian, the foundation of the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949), Articles 27 (protection of civilians) and 33 (prohibition of collective punishment).  In other words, he publicly endorsed what the world now recognises as Israel’s campaign of extermination in Gaza.Herzog has doubled down repeatedly since then.  

In December 2023, as famine warnings mounted, he told reporters that Israel had “every right to defend itself in any manner necessary”, including the total siege of Gaza.  By January 2024, when UN agencies reported that children were dying of starvation every day, Herzog dismissed international criticism as “antisemitic bias”. 

When the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague ruled in January 2024 that there was a plausible case of genocide against Israel, Herzog did not treat it as a warning.  Instead, he denounced the ruling and continued to provide cover for Netanyahu’s government.

The pattern is clear: Herzog has not acted as a ceremonial figure above politics. He has been an active propagandist for mass killing.

_{The Legal Case Against Herzog}

The argument that Herzog 'has no power' is irrelevant under international law. The law cares about acts of incitement, legitimation, and complicity, not whether someone held the pen that signed a military order.

• The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948), Article III(c), criminalises 'direct and public incitement to commit genocide'. No requirement exists that the speaker has executive authority.
• The Rome Statute (1998), Article 25(3)(e), repeats this standard.
• The UK International Criminal Court Act 2001, Section 51, incorporates these offences into domestic law, giving UK courts jurisdiction when such suspects are present in the country.

Britain also has obligations under the Geneva Conventions Act 1957 to prosecute or extradite individuals suspected of grave breaches of the Conventions.  The Fourth Geneva Convention (Articles 146–147) requires states to 'search for persons alleged to have committed, or to have ordered to be committed, such grave breaches'. That obligation is not optional.  Herzog’s presence in the UK would, in a rules-based order, trigger immediate legal action.

And there is precedent: in 2009, a London magistrate’s court issued an arrest warrant against Tzipi Livni, Israel’s former foreign minister, for her role in Operation Cast Lead (2008–09), where Israeli forces killed over 1,400 Palestinians, the majority civilians. The warrant was withdrawn only because the Foreign Office intervened under pressure. The principle remains: British courts have the jurisdiction to act against foreign officials accused of war crimes.  Herzog’s case is even clearer.  He has personally and in full view engaged in public incitement to genocide.

^{declassifieduk.org Labour MPs Peter Prinsley, Kevin McKenna and Cat Eccles together with Luciana Berger meeting Isaac Herzog on an Israeli freebie in May 2025.} 

_{Britain’s Selective Application of International Law}

Imagine for a moment that Herzog were Russian.  Suppose the ceremonial President of Russia had declared that 'all Ukrainians are responsible' and that 'there are no innocent civilians in Kyiv'.  Suppose he had defended the bombing of hospitals and the starvation of children.  Would Britain be rolling out the red carpet?  Or would there be calls for sanctions, ICC referrals, and immediate arrest?  This is not a false equivalence, we would quite rightly use the full weight of the law against them.

The hypocrisy is suffocating. When it is Russia, Iran, or Venezuela, the law is sharp and immediate.  When it is Israel, the law is bent, twisted, or ignored.  This is not a technical oversight. It is a political choice.  The UK government has chosen to shield Israeli officials from accountability, even when their actions meet the threshold of genocide. By doing so, Britain itself is in breach of its obligations under international law, complicity through inaction.

_{Herzog’s Visit: A Diplomatic Whitewash}

So what does Herzog’s trip really represent?  It is not about diplomacy.  It is not about 'dialogue' or 'shared values'.  It is a performance of impunity and a passive aggressive reminder to the British Government about how financially invested Israel is in Britain looking the other way.  Herzog arrives not as a ceremonial guest but as a living symbol of the crimes Britain refuses to confront.

Every handshake with a minister is a message: 'You are welcome here, no matter what you have said or done'.  Every guard of honour is a signal to Palestinians that their lives mean less than geopolitics.  Every red carpet rolled out is a shred of credibility ripped away from the so-called 'rules-based international order'.  Herzog is not a neutral guest.  He is an apologist for mass murder. His presence in London is not just benign, it is a stain.

^{Psychopath: Isaac Hertzog signing bombs bound for Gaza}

_{Britain’s Duty}

If Britain meant a single word of its rhetoric on Ukraine, it would act consistently. Herzog would not be hosted, he would be arrested. The UK Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that international crimes are justiciable in domestic courts (see R v. Bow Street Magistrates ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3) [2000] 1 AC 147). The precedent is clear: former heads of state can be held accountable for international crimes. Herzog, as a current head of state with no executive authority, has even fewer protections.  Britain has the tools.  It has the law. It lacks only the courage.

_{The Verdict}

So the message is clear.  Isaac Herzog should not be stepping onto the tarmac at Heathrow as a guest of the British government.  He should be stepping into a cell, pending extradition to The Hague.  Until Britain acts on its own laws, every honour it extends to Herzog, every photo op, every press release, every ministerial handshake is complicity.

Herzog is not a ceremonial bystander.  He is not a harmless elder statesman.  He is a man who has incited genocide and legitimised war crimes.  So when the cameras flash this Wednesday, remember this: Herzog is not a guest of honour.  He is a criminal suspect and every red carpet rolled out for him is stained with blood of tens of thousands of innocent children.

And by association and complicity our hands are stained with that blood too.

References

• International Criminal Court, Rome Statute (1998), Articles 7, 8, 25.
• Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948), Article III(c).
• Geneva Conventions (1949), Fourth Convention, Articles 27, 33, 55, 146–147.
• UK Geneva Conventions Act 1957.
• UK International Criminal Court Act 2001, Section 51.
• R v. Bow Street Magistrates ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3) [2000] 1 AC 147.
• Livni arrest warrant, Westminster Magistrates’ Court (2009).
• Herzog press conference, 13 October 2023 (Office of the President of Israel, reported widely by BBC, The Guardian, Al Jazeera).
• International Court of Justice, South Africa v. Israel, Order of 26 January 2024 (plausible case of genocide).

A bit of shameless self-plugging here. This is www.TetleysTLDR.com blog. It's not monetised. Please feel free to go and look at the previous blogs on the website and if you like them, please feel free to share them.