This post is also available in:
English 
Italiano (Italian) 
Deutsch (German) 
فارسی (Persian) 
Português (Portuguese (Brazil)) 
Русский (Russian)
Short answer
The decision by the ICC to issue warrants for the Israeli prime minister and its minister of defense has been denounced by several top world leaders, including Germany and the US.
Furthermore, the ICC operates under the Rome Statute, to which neither Israel nor the US are signatories. For example, the ICC has no legal jurisdiction whatsoever regarding Judea & Samaria or Gaza.
The reasons behind this decision are currently under investigation and are seen as reeking of double standards and the politicization of the courts. Worse atrocities, such as the terror genocide acts of Assad in Syria, have not been addressed in a similar manner
Long answer
The decision by the ICC to issue warrants for the Israeli prime minister and its minister of defense had been met with denouncement from several top world leaders, such as those from Germany and the US.
First and foremost, the manner in which Prosecutor Karim Khan announced his arrest warrants for both Hamas leaders and Israeli leaders in the same instance draws an appalling and ludicrous equivalency between a globally designated terror organization and a sovereign, independent, democratic nation with its own judiciary combating that terror entity.
Unlike Hamas, Israel has its own world-renowned judiciary, and this decision completely overlooks the ICC’s purpose, which is to intervene where such power does not exist. The ICC’s decision appears to be heavily politicized, especially when considering that other world leaders responsible for far worse atrocities against their own nations (such as the Syrian genocide conducted by Assad) have not faced any arrest warrants.
Many prominent figures view this as a radical move to interfere forcefully with Israel’s right to defend itself against the barbaric terror organization Hamas.
