A bipartisan group of senators and Secretary Blinken are pledging to work on a solution to “strenuously object” to the applications for arrest warrants by the International Criminal Court against members of the Israeli government. 

At a Foreign Relations Committee hearing Tuesday, Mr. Blinken was effusively praised by Republicans for his condemnations of the court. 

Following the announcement Monday by the prosecutor for the ICC, Karim Khan, that he had issued applications for arrest warrants for Prime Minister Netanyahu, the Israeli defense minister, Yoav Gallant, and three Hamas officials, Senator Graham said he would work “feverishly” with members of both parties to begin crafting a response to the ICC warrants. 

By Tuesday morning, Mr. Graham announced he had formed that bipartisan group. In addition to Mr. Graham, it includes three other Republicans and four Democrats. Mr. Graham was joined by the no. 2 Senate Republican, Senator Thune; the top Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Risch; and a first-term lawmaker, Senator Britt. 

The Democrats brought a similar coterie of experienced, pro-Israel legislators: The chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Cardin; two senior Foreign Relations Committee members, Senators Shaheen and Blumenthal; and a freshman of their own, Senator Fetterman. 

Like President Biden, the gang of eight said there was no equivalence between the Jewish state and Hamas, and that the ICC had crossed a red line. “The application for arrest warrants also draws a false equivalence between Israel with its longstanding commitment to the rule of law, and Hamas’ theocratic, autocratic, and unaccountable rule over Gaza. To state the obvious: Israel is a functioning democracy, while Hamas is a terrorist organization,” the lawmakers write. 

They believe that any bad actors in Israel can be dealt with via the country’s judicial system, unlike Hamas leaders who are not subject to any domestic, independent courts. Israel being a “functioning democracy, with an independent judiciary and military justice system,” allows it to self-police, they argue. 

“Acting today without engaging the Israeli government on these specific concerns calls into question the unbiased approach ICC investigations are supposed to have,” the senators write. “We will continue to work in a bipartisan manner to strenuously object to the ICC’S actions against our ally, Israel, and take appropriate steps to help Israel and protect American personnel.”

Mr. Blinken echoed that approach during an appearance before the Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday. 

Mr. Risch asked Mr. Blinken if he would be willing to work on a legislative solution to “the Afghanistan question,” referring to an ICC investigation into American actions during that war, and “the ICC sticking its nose in the business of countries that have an independent, legitimate, democratic judicial system.”

“In short … we want to work with you on a bipartisan basis to find an appropriate response,” Mr. Blinken said. “I’m committed to doing that. As you’ve said, the devil’s in the details, so let’s see what you’ve got and we can take it from there.”

The secretary was also praised by Mr. Risch for calling out the ICC arrest warrants application as a false “equivalence” between Hamas and Israel. “Sometimes we don’t agree on stuff, but I got to tell you, on the ICC you got it exactly right. Your characterization of it being a shameful equivalence that they have engaged in is actually stunning,” Mr. Risch said. 

America has never issued sanctions against the ICC itself, though it has sanctioned court officials individually. In 2020, the Trump administration issued sanctions against prosecutor Fatou Bensouda and an ICC prosecution official, Phakiso Mochochoko. Secretary Pompeo announced at the time that he had also restricted travel and visas to other unnamed ICC officials and family members. 

In April 2021, Mr. Biden rescinded those sanctions. The secretary defended that decision before senators on Tuesday. 

“In lifting sanctions that were previously implemented, the intent — the purpose — was to find the best way to protect our service members who served in Afghanistan, and we believe we did that,” he said. “But given the events of yesterday, I think we have to look at the appropriate steps to take to deal with … a profoundly wrongheaded decision” by the ICC.