U.S. Sanctions the International Criminal Court, Vowing to Dismantle It 'Brick by Brick'
Imposing Sanctions on the International Criminal Court
Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced sanctions on the International Criminal Court, banning transactions and cutting off its resources. The U.S. has long rejected the ICC's authority over Americans, and after what it calls a year of inaction, it is now moving to cripple the court. Rubio warned that either the ICC ends its threats or the U.S. will end the ICC, urging allies to rein in the court.
Either the ICC will end its threats, or we will end the ICC.
- sdcfgy
As an outside observer, the US administration is an embarrassment to the country. You're never going to come back from this. Well done.
- medina
The sanctions announcement coincided with a former ICC judge, Navanethem “Navi” Pillay, being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for her contributions to enlarging the scope and impact of international law. -- https://thehill.com/policy/international/6138693-rubio-impos...
- socializer
I know there's a lot of (deserved) hate for the current administration, but the ICC situation is somewhat nuanced. You can argue that international law doesn't / shouldn't exist because each country has the right to self-determination, and any disputes on that line are always decided by who has more economic sway or military strength. There's no world police that a smaller and less powerful country can send to arrest the leaders of a more powerful neighbor, unless they find enough friends with fighter jets.
Now, as it happens, the US is one of the most economically and militarily powerful states out there, so they're the closest we have to an actual world police - but again, that police doesn't follow "international law", they act in what they think is the best interest of the West (or the US specifically). That's how all regional powers roll, albeit on a smaller scale. Russia and China make claims to neighboring states, Germany unceremoniously protects its economic interests in the EU, Iran bankrolls terrorists in neighboring states who in turn bomb Iran, and so on.
The ICC is a bit unusual in that it's an initiative of some Western states trying to get the most powerful state to play by their rules. It's a nice try, but also... obviously doomed?
And it's not something the US can ignore, because the court does assert the authority to arrest and try US servicemen and politicians. So this was kinda inevitable, and if you think the sanctions are bad, consider the bipartisan Hag […]
- hexis
The American Service-Members' Protection Act has been US law since 2002, and was nicknamed "the Hague Invasion Act, since the act would allow the president to order military action in The Hague, the seat of the ICC, to prevent U.S. or allied officials and military personnel from being prosecuted or detained by the ICC." The sanctions are new, but the posture is old and bipartisan. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pr...
- noitpmeder
The article is (probably purposefully) unclear of what actually is happening here... what sanctions are being applied, to whom, and to what effect?
- cromka
> America never joined the court. We don’t need it. And we don’t want it.
Wow, so tough, much decision
- pluc
Why stop there? Let's do all other collaborative groups that don't put the US and their corrupted agenda first. You wanna be left alone and we don't want to have you so just make the calls.
- mendym
Does this mean that Microsoft or Google can no longer offer services (like mail/office/search etc..) to the ICC? Similar to what happened with the ICC prosecutor last year?