HASBARA EXPOSED: An article titled „It’s a complete mystery why the Hungarian government is returning to the International Criminal Court,” written by László Seres and published on the Neokohn website
The article "A complete mystery as to why the Hungarian government is returning to the International Criminal Court" published on Neokohn by László Seres is a classic example of opinion-forming relevant to hasbara (Israeli state PR, information strategy and narrative management).
The primary goal of hasbara is to protect Israel's state legitimacy in the international press and public opinion, morally justify its actions, and delegitimize legal or political criticism of the country.
A detailed analysis of the article based on the main mechanisms and communication strategies of hasbara:
1. Emotionally charged language and labeling
A key element of hasbara is the discrediting of critical institutions and decisions with strong, emotionally charged epithets. The article does not treat the International Criminal Court (ICC) as a neutral legal forum, but systematically dehumanizes and delegitimizes it:
He calls the ICC decision "scandalous", "unacceptable", "shameful" and "absurd".
He describes the operation of the Hague court as "Hague hypocrisy.".
It presents Attorney General Karim Khan not through his function, but by tarnishing his personal reputation ("he has become infamous for sexual misconduct"), thereby weakening the weight of the decision of the institution he leads.
2. Defending legitimacy and rejecting moral equivalence
The basic thesis of hasbara is that Israel is a democratic state fighting for its survival and legitimate self-defense, and therefore its actions are morally incomparable to those of terrorist groups. The article uses this panel:
He indignantly rejects the fact that the panel „equated the perpetrators of the horrific October 7 attack (…) with the democratically elected leaders of the attacked country.”.
It frames the military operations in Gaza solely as „legitimate self-defense and aimed at eliminating terror, not the Palestinian people.”
3. Selective contextualization and deflection
Hasbara often employs the technique of deflecting specific humanitarian or legal accusations, presenting them as absurd, or reducing them to political motivations.
Downplaying the charges: The article summarily calls the war crimes charge of starvation „absurd” and quickly mentions a later statement by the Prosecutor General about the lack of evidence of genocide, in order to bracket other points of war crimes (e.g. collective punishment, deprivation of basic goods).
Transferring to the political plane: The article agrees with Péter Szijjártó, who says that „a legal case is being used as a political tool against Israel.” This is one of the most common turns of hasbara: it portrays legal proceedings not as the enforcement of international law, but as political witch hunts.
4. External allies and showing consensus
Part of the strategy is to demonstrate that Israel is not alone in its narrative, and that key players in the „civilized world” stand by it. To this end, the article highlights:
The White House's outrage.
The position of the British government, which also does not consider the decision authoritative.
The Orbán government's previous solidarity, which wanted to withdraw from the ICC just before Netanyahu's visit, expressing the "special relationship".
5. Framing it as a victory for the enemy
When an international organization makes a decision unfavorable to Israel, hasbara likes to point out that this helps terrorists. The author emphasizes that Hamas hailed the ICC decision as „a victory for the Palestinian cause” – „not by chance.” With this logic, he suggests that anyone who supports the ICC (or, in this case, backs down on it, like the Hungarian government) implicitly strengthens Hamas’ narrative.
6. Emphasizing the lack of jurisdiction (Legalist Argument)
The hasbara also uses technical-legal arguments when moral reasoning is not enough: it highlights that Israel has never ratified the Rome Statute, so the court has no jurisdiction over it. (However, it does not elaborate on the legal detail that the ICC has jurisdiction over acts committed in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, regardless of citizenship, through the Palestinian Authority’s member state status.).
Summary
The article is presented as a political analysis (criticizing the actions of the Hungarian government and Péter Magyar), but its argumentative structure is entirely based on the principles of hasbara. It examines the domestic policy decision (rejoining the ICC) not in the context of Hungarian sovereignty or general international law, but almost exclusively through the filter of how it affects Israel's international defense and diplomatic positions.
