Israel vs the ICC?

 Although everybody's preoccupied with the US Presidential campaign(including I must confess myself), I am more intrigued by what will happen AFTER the elections when the Palestinian Authority will make another(and quite possibly successful) bid for formal admission to the UN General Assembly as a fully fledged observer state(like the Holy See or North Korea). If the PA is successful(and only a two thirds majority in the GA is necessary to admit it as a full fledged state as opposed to an "entity",) it is highly likely that the newly admitted state will sign and ratify the International Criminal Court Convention( only a state has the authority to ask for the ICC to initiate an investigation into a purported war crime- "Operation Cast Lead" springs to mind), Israel and by extension the US( whether under a reelected President Obama or a newly elected President Romney is irrlevant) will be placed in a deeply uncomfortable, almost untenable position. If the ICC decides to open inquiries into say "Operation Cast Lead", Israel can either refuse to cooperate with the Court( arguing that it is not a signatory to it and should not be bound by its acts, accusing it  and the PA of "lawfare"), whioch will turn it into a political and social pariah internationally( much like apartheid era South Africa incidentally), or it can cooperate with it(and even that is hghly damaging PR wise). the US too, will be forced to either defend or disassociate itself from Israel( the former being internationally unpopular whilst the latter is even more so domestically). Critics will note statements from past( and if reelected present) US Presidents such as Franklin D. Roosevelt, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama about the necessity to bring alleged war criminals to justice- unless, presumably if they happen to belong to the State of Israel, the "sacred beast of the Middle East". The Bush Administration explictly opposed the ICC of course,arguing that it might engage in "frivolous" or "politically motivated" lawsuits against US officials or servicemen( requests to the Wall Street Journal which has frequently assialed the ICC in similar terms by me to define what consititutes"frivolous" or "politically motivated" have as yet gone unanswered; in the decade of its existence the ICC has NEVER engaged in such conduct). True, the Court has no armed force of its own, but any Israeli official( military or civilian) so indicted by it, can never leave the boundaries of his or her native land for fear of arrest as a war criminal(shades of Augusto Pinochet or more recently "Dubya" Bush). Of course it's always possible that the PA might be defeated in its bid for formal statehood or that the Court might not decide to reply positively to a PA request, but with recent criticism that it only goes after African alleged "perps"( Joseph Kony, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir), the temptation to indict "white" Israel might be overwhelming.
 
All in all, I'd say look what happens next month AFTER Election Day in America!
 
Terry