New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has once again declared Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a “war criminal,” said he is unwelcome in New York, and called on the federal government to enforce the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrant against him.

The demand is practically meaningless. Mamdani has now acknowledged that NYC lacks the legal authority to arrest Netanyahu, despite previously suggesting that he could direct the New York Police Department to do so. The United States is not a party to the ICC, does not recognize its authority over Americans or Israelis, and has no obligation under the Rome Statute to execute its warrants. President Donald Trump has also made clear that Netanyahu will not be arrested on American soil.

Mamdani’s demand therefore sounds less like a serious proposal than a political performance. But the ideology behind it should not be dismissed so easily.

Mamdani has repeatedly described Israel’s military campaign in Gaza as a “genocide” funded by the United States. That is an extraordinarily serious accusation — one that should require extraordinary evidence.

Genocide is not simply a synonym for war, civilian casualties, destruction, or even excessive military force. Under the Genocide Convention, it requires specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. That intent is what separates genocide from other alleged violations of international law.

There can be a legitimate debate over Israel’s conduct. Reasonable people may ask whether particular operations used excessive force, whether enough precautions were taken to protect civilians or whether Israeli officials made serious strategic errors. Those questions could be examined honestly.

But that is not the argument Mamdani is making. He is presenting the most inflammatory possible allegation as a fact.

Doing so cheapens a word associated with the deliberate extermination of Armenians, European Jews, and the Tutsi population of Rwanda. Those atrocities were organized attempts to eliminate entire peoples. Using the same terminology as a political weapon against a country responding to the deadliest terrorist attack in its history is not serious moral analysis.

Israel represents much of what the far Left despises: a democratic, Western-aligned nation that defends itself militarily, values national sovereignty and participates in a market economy. Netanyahu himself played a significant role as finance minister in reducing state control, cutting taxes, privatizing government industries and opening Israel’s economy to greater competition.

That does not make Israel or Netanyahu immune from criticism. It does, however, help explain why activists who view Western institutions as inherently oppressive have turned Israel into a symbol of everything they want to dismantle.

Mamdani’s deference to the ICC also reveals a deeper conflict with the American constitutional tradition. The United States was built on self-government, national sovereignty, and distrust of distant authorities that are not accountable to the American people. Americans do not surrender their laws to an international court simply because politicians in Europe or officials in The Hague demand it.

Mamdani wants the federal government to subordinate American sovereignty to a supranational institution the United States never joined — all to arrest the elected leader of a close democratic ally.

His proposal may never become reality. But it provides another warning about “democratic” socialism and the worldview behind it. These comments are yet another reminder that a country may vote its way into socialism, but it never votes its way back out. Either the system collapses before voters have the opportunity to reverse course, or the government slides into authoritarianism.

In Mamdani’s case, he appears willing to let a supranational organization override American sovereignty — a position fundamentally incompatible with the principles of the United States.

I never viewed Zohran Mamdani himself as the real threat. I don’t think he’ll be the worst mayor New York City has ever had. The city survived Bill de Blasio, and many of its problems long predate Mamdani. If anything, he at least appears to genuinely care about the city, which is more than can be said for some politicians.

The real issue is what he represents. Alongside figures like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Mamdani has become the face of the Democrat Party’s shift toward “democratic” socialism. His comments should not be viewed as those of just one politician. They reflect the direction of the modern Democrat Party and the agenda it embraces. While I hope that vision never prevails nationally, it is unrealistic to assume Democrats will never win another election. If the party continues on its current trajectory, the country could eventually elect a Communist as president.