Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

US Threatens ICC With Sanctions Over Future Investigations – Report

Sputnik – 10.12.2025

The Trump administration has threatened the International Criminal Court (ICC) with potential sanctions if it does not amend its founding documents to exclude President Donald Trump and his top officials from future investigations, Reuters reported on Wednesday, citing an administration official.

In addition to its pledge not to target the US, the Trump administration also demands that the ICC halt existing investigations into Israel and American military actions in Afghanistan, the report said.

In return for these concessions, the Trump administration is prepared to forgo additional sanctions on court officials and refrain from sanctioning the court itself, according to the report.

Washington has conveyed its demands to ICC members and directly to the court, which has 125 members, the report added.

The United States is not a signatory to the Rome Statute, which established the ICC in 2002 with powers to prosecute heads of state.

In recent years, the ICC has issued arrest warrants for several world leaders, including Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. These decisions have been criticized. Some states, such as Hungary, decided to withdraw from the ICC.

On February 6, Trump signed the executive order on sanctions against the ICC for its actions against Washington and its allies, including Israel. The order states that the US will take significant measures against those “responsible for the ICC’s transgressions.” Some of the measures include the blocking of property and assets, as well as the suspension of entry into the US for ICC staff and their family members.

December 10, 2025 Posted by | War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

Israeli-linked lawyer told ICC chief prosecutor: Drop Gaza case or be ‘destroyed’

MEMO | July 16, 2025

“They will destroy you and they will destroy the court,” an Israeli ICC lawyer connected to Benjamin Netanyahu warned Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan while urging him to drop the war crimes probe against the Israeli Prime Minister and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant.

The warning was delivered during a private meeting in The Hague on 1 May by Nicholas Kaufman, a British-Israeli lawyer who currently defends former Philippines president Rodrigo Duterte at the ICC. According to an internal note seen by Middle East Eye, Kaufman told Khan he had spoken to Netanyahu’s legal adviser and had been “authorised” to propose a confidential solution to help the prosecutor “climb down the tree”, meaning to back away from the case discreetly.

Kaufman advised Khan to reclassify the case files as confidential so that Israel could respond to the allegations in private, rather than through public proceedings. But he also issued a warning: if Khan were to pursue further charges, such as for far-right Israeli ministers, Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, “all options would be off the table.” He then added, “They will destroy you and they will destroy the court.”

Khan and his wife, who was present at the meeting, both understood the words as a direct threat. Kaufman later denied issuing any threat and claimed he was acting on his own initiative, not on behalf of the Israeli government.

The case at the heart of this controversy concerns the ICC’s investigation into war crimes committed during Israel’s ongoing military assault on Gaza. On 20 May 2024, Khan formally applied for arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant for alleged crimes including the starvation of civilians and the targeting of protected populations. Six months later the court issued arrest warrants for the Israeli leaders.

This attempt at intimidation is not an isolated incident. It follows a pattern of pressure, threats and political interference aimed at protecting Israel from international accountability. In February, the US imposed personal sanctions on Khan, revoking his visa and freezing his assets. His family was also barred from entering the US. In June, four ICC judges who approved the arrest warrants were similarly sanctioned.

Shortly after the 1 May meeting with Kaufman, allegations of sexual misconduct were leaked to the media against Khan. While the ICC initially closed its investigation due to the lack of cooperation by the complainant, the allegations re-emerged in the press through anonymous sources, prompting a new probe. Khan has denied all allegations. Although the proximity of events has prompted speculation, there is said to be no evidence to suggest a connection between the allegations against Khan and his meeting with Kaufman.

These efforts mirror tactics used against Khan’s predecessor. Fatou Bensouda, the former ICC chief prosecutor, has publicly revealed that she too faced threats and surveillance when she began investigating Israeli war crimes. In an interview with The Guardian, she described “thug-style tactics” that included hacking, harassment of her family and threats that she would “pay the price” for her work.

Israel’s allies in the West have also played a key role in undermining the court’s independence. Then British Foreign Secretary David Cameron reportedly warned Khan in April 2024 that issuing arrest warrants against Israeli officials would be “like dropping a hydrogen bomb.” Around the same time, US Senator Lindsey Graham threatened ICC staff with further sanctions if they moved forward.

The ICC is not the only international body under fire. Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories, has also been targeted. In July, the US imposed sanctions against her, citing her “direct engagement” with the ICC’s investigation into Israeli war crimes.

Albanese has faced sustained smear campaigns and death threats—part of what observers describe as a broader effort to silence those demanding accountability for Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Rights groups and UN experts have condemned the sanctions as an attack on the independence of international human rights mechanisms and a chilling warning to other officials who might support the ICC’s work.

July 16, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , | 1 Comment

Can international institutions be reformed?

By Raphael Machado | Strategic Culture Foundation | June 30, 2025

It appears that Israel and Iran have postponed World War III and, for now, seem to adhere to the ceasefire negotiated by Donald Trump (likely with the help of other countries). But even if the “12-Day War” has stopped and missiles are no longer flying back and forth, doubts remain about the fate of Iran’s nuclear program.

The U.S. government insists that Iran’s nuclear program no longer exists, while Iran maintains that its nuclear program is still operational. All signs indicate that the Iranians are correct and that the U.S. is once again constructing a purely simulated parallel reality for the sake of narrative power projection.

But the main issue is not this—it is, in fact, something few have mentioned, as recently noted by Sergey Lavrov: the role of Rafael Grossi and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

The IAEA was founded in 1957 as an “autonomous” agency—though linked to the UN—with the goal of monitoring nations’ use of nuclear energy to promote peaceful applications and prevent the construction of nuclear weapons. In this capacity, IAEA teams visit nuclear power plants, research centers, and other facilities related to national nuclear programs to conduct safety checks and oversee enrichment levels.

However, it is important to note that despite its claims of “autonomy,” the IAEA was established at the insistence of the U.S., shortly after the abandonment of the post-WWII “utopian” idea of keeping nuclear weapons under the exclusive control of the UN. The institution has always been closer to the interests of the Western Bloc than to those of the Eastern Bloc or the Non-Aligned Movement.

That said, in the past, the IAEA did challenge U.S. claims about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, under the leadership of Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei.

But even during ElBaradei’s tenure, there were signs of a shift toward Western alignment. In writings from that period, ElBaradei advocated for a revival of the utopian, globalist vision of nuclear energy monopolized by a “multinational” agency—much like the various Western agencies controlled or influenced by the U.S. ElBaradei himself became a collaborator with the U.S. after his term ended, participating in the color revolution orchestrated in Egypt against Hosni Mubarak.

It was only during Yukiya Amano’s leadership that the IAEA’s collaboration with the U.S. became evident, thanks to WikiLeaks revelations. According to documents obtained by Julian Assange, in a meeting between Amano and U.S. diplomats, Amano explicitly stated that he was aligned with the U.S. regarding staffing decisions and the stance to be taken on Iran’s nuclear program. This, of course, meant that Amano filled the IAEA with U.S. collaborators. He was later accused by IAEA staff themselves of having a pro-Western bias.

This context helps explain the behavior of Rafael Grossi, Amano’s successor.

Fast-forward to June: Grossi prepared a report accusing Iran of failing to meet its obligations to the IAEA and scheduled a board meeting for the same day Trump’s 60-day ultimatum on negotiations with Iran expired. According to CNN, the U.S. contacted several board members to persuade them to vote in favor of Grossi’s resolution. The purpose was to lend an institutional veneer of legitimacy to Israel’s attacks against Iran.

Grossi’s report was entirely based on information provided by Mossad, which alleged the existence of previously unknown nuclear facilities containing traces of enriched uranium.

All evidence suggests that Grossi was aware of the imminent attack and collaborated in creating a pretext to justify Israel’s actions. This is further corroborated by the fact that Grossi has never once turned his attention to Israel’s nuclear program, which remains entirely opaque, free from any international inspections.

In light of these revelations, it is alarming that, as Grossi told the Financial Times earlier this year, he intends to run for UN Secretary-General. Given his track record, it is plausible that he will have U.S. backing, which would greatly aid his candidacy.

Cases like this are not isolated. We have seen how the International Criminal Court (ICC) moved to accuse Vladimir Putin and Russia of “kidnapping” Ukrainian children. The World Health Organization (WHO), meanwhile, attempted to override national sovereignty during the pandemic. The IMF is routinely used to deindustrialize Third World countries.

The list could go on.

The key issue, however, is this: Given the current state of international institutions, can they be reformed?

Or will we need to abandon them—as Iran did with the IAEA—and build new ones from scratch?

June 30, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Trump sanctions ICC

RT | February 6, 2025

US President Donald Trump has signed an executive order imposing sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC) for investigating the US and its allies. Last November the Hague-based court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defense minister, Yoav Gallant, in a move that angered US officials.

Trump’s executive order will enforce financial and visa-related sanctions on individuals and families who support ICC investigations into US citizens or allied nations.

The ICC has been preparing for a “swift assault” from the new US administration, the Guardian reported last month, citing sources within the organization. The measures could affect the ICC’s access to banking and payment systems, IT infrastructure, and insurance providers, the publication said. It could also “paralyze” the court’s work and pose “an existential threat” to its functioning.

Earlier this month, the US House of Representatives voted to impose sanctions that would cancel US visas and place financial restrictions on any ICC officials prosecuting US “allies.”

The US adopted the American Service-Members’ Protection Act in 2002 – nicknamed “The Hague Invasion Act.” The legislation was designed to protect American military personnel, as well as elected and appointed officials, from prosecution by international legal bodies which Washington has not recognized.

The act authorizes the US president to use “all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any US or allied personnel” detained or imprisoned on behalf of the ICC, since the US is not a party to the Rome Statute regulating its activities. The authorization implies potential military action, leading to the act’s informal name.

The ICC’s attempt to investigate alleged American war crimes in Afghanistan in 2020 resulted in the US placing sanctions on then prosecutor Fatou Bensouda.

The court has accused Netanyahu and Gallant of using starvation as a method of warfare in Gaza, as well as deliberately depriving the enclave’s civilian population of essential supplies such as food, water, and medicine without any “obvious military necessity.” Washington says the ICC lacks jurisdiction over Israel, since it is also not a signatory to the Rome Statute.

Last year, however, the US praised Karim Khan, the same ICC prosecutor who requested arrest warrants against Israeli leaders, when he brought charges against Russian President Vladimir Putin. Moscow is not a party to the agreement establishing the court.

February 6, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Games of the ICC

By Christopher Black – New Eastern Outlook – November 26, 2024

On November 21, the prosecutor of the ICC announced that a three-judge panel has finally made a decision on his May 2024 application for an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.

A warrant for his arrest and that of his former Defence Minister, Gallant, has been issued. If an indictment has been drawn up, which should precede an arrest warrant, we are not told and none appears on the ICC website.

Many are celebrating the arrest warrant against Netanyahu and Gallant.  But, while there is no doubt that they deserve to be held to account by the Palestinians and the world for the crimes they have and continue to commit in Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and Iran, they are not charged with the crime of genocide, even though they are charged with inflicting mass starvation on the people of Gaza, nor the supreme war crimes of aggression for their continued illegal occupation of Palestinian lands and the brutal suppression of the Palestinian resistance to that occupation. Nor are they charged for their aggression against the sovereign nations of Lebanon, Syria and Iran, which crimes they openly brag about and which are recognised by the entire world, but not, it seems, by the prosecutor or judges of the ICC.

Further, as people calm down in their cheering, they must realise that the ICC has also issued arrest warrants for a leader of Hamas, Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri whose alleged war crimes are nothing more than echoes of Israeli propaganda about the Palestinian armed resistance to the brutal occupation of Palestinian lands and the brutal oppression by the occupation forces of the Palestinian people.

Where is the charge of Genocide?

Netanyahu and Gallant are charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity for mass starvation and targeting the civilian population with aerial attacks, and mass attacks by Israeli armoured and other forces.

The ICC press release states,

“Each bear criminal responsibility for the following crimes as co-perpetrators for committing the acts jointly with others: the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare, and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts.”

“The Chamber also found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant each bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing an attack against the civilian population.”

But these charges also amount to acts of genocide, so why are they not charged with genocide? And why has no indictment been issued? Only the prosecutor and the judges can explain, and they do not.

But aside from pointing out the obvious compromise made by the ICC, to placate its critics about its inaction over Israeli crimes by laying charges yet not laying the most serious charge, the one that should be laid, we have this phrase underlined above which needs to be considered, the phrase, “jointly with others.” 

Israel’s Partners in Crime Untouched

Who are the “others”? The ICC coyly refuses to say, hoping no one will ask the question. But the answer is clear: the USA, the EU, UK, France, Canada and the rest, who all give military aid and support to Israeli to carry out these crimes and have made themselves co-belligerents in this murderous war against the peoples of the Middle East, and are its partners in crime.  The leaders of those nations must also be charged and warrants issued for their arrest. They are equally culpable under international law. But they are not charged. So that, in his defence, Netanyahu, if he is ever brought before this tribunal, can argue the defence of selective prosecution, that is, he can ask, “why am I charged but not the co-conspirators, the co-actors who supported and encouraged my crimes. It is not just to charge me if they are not going to be charged.”

He would be right to use that defence, and perhaps the prosecutor has arranged it so that Netanyahu and Gallant now have that defence available to them.

Political Purpose of the Warrants

But we know that Netanyahu will never be arrested and face a trial at this so-called world court. The Americans immediately came to his defence and denounced the action of the ICC. They have to because if Netanyahu is ever before the judges of the ICC, they fear the facts about their role in the crimes against the Palestinians and the others will be revealed in all their detail and depravity. The British, the French, and the Canadians will have their dirty crimes exposed as well. None of the allies of Israel want Netanyahu arrested and tried. So he will not be. The ICC knows this.

So why was the warrant finally issued after so long a delay, after so much political interference was exerted by Britain, the US, the French and others to prevent the ICC from issuing charges?

We can only speculate, as we are not privy to the phone calls between Mr. Khan and the various governments involved in these crimes, and how it was all arranged, but it was a political decision of a political prosecutor of a political tribunal.

One reason can be to improve the image of the ICC, to make it look like it is doing something, while, in effect, nothing is done to change the situation for the Palestinians, the Lebanese, the Iranians, and the Syrians. It will placate some who support the Palestinians, who think the ICC is a real court, and perhaps it is hoped that this will reduce the street protests across Europe and elsewhere. No need now the ICC will say, we have acted, and you can go home now.

The ICC attempts to justify its charges against Russia

But there is another reason, and that is to trick people into thinking the ICC is some real arbiter of international justice and therefore the arrest warrants the ICC issued against President Putin and others are valid and should be acted upon.

The ICC has issued warrants of arrest of a series of Russian officials over the past few months; we suppose to keep the pot boiling, each as absurd as the one before it.

On 17 March 2023, the ICC issued warrants for Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation, and Ms Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova, Commissioner for Children’s Rights in the Office of the President of the Russian Federation. Based on the Prosecution’s applications of 22 February 2023, Pre-Trial Chamber II considered that there are reasonable grounds to believe that each suspect bears responsibility for the war crime of unlawful deportation of population (children) and that of unlawful transfer of population (children) from occupied areas of Ukraine to the Russian Federation, in prejudice of Ukrainian children.

The absurdity of these charges and warrants, based solely on Kiev propaganda about Russia’s attempts to save the lives of children, is manifest. It is also clear that they did not charge President Putin with aggression because there has been none, and so they decided to use the most emotive charge possible to inflame public opinion against Russia. In other words, the ICC became an active tool of NATO in its war against Russia.

On 5 March 2024, the ICC issued warrants of arrest for Sergei Ivanovich Kobylash, a Lieutenant General in the Russian Armed Forces who at the relevant time was the Commander of the Long-Range Aviation of the Aerospace Force, and Viktor Nikolayevich Sokolov, an Admiral in the Russian Navy, who at the relevant time was the Commander of the Black Sea Fleet for the war crime of directing attacks at civilian objects, the war crime of causing excessive incidental harm to civilians or damage to civilian objects, and the crime against humanity of inhumane acts. None of these allegations are based on any facts or any investigation and meant to be propaganda.

On 24 June 2024, the ICC issued warrants of arrest Sergei Shoigu and Valery Gerasimov, in the context of the situation in Ukraine for alleged international crimes committed from at least 10 October 2022 until at least 9 March 2023 for the same reasons, war propaganda, to justify the continuance of the war against Russia.

Ukraine leadership given immunity from prosecution for its crimes

The ICC has not charged anyone in the illegitimate government of Ukraine for any of its crimes against the civilian population of Ukraine in the Donbass oblasts from 2014 to today, nor for its gratuitous attacks on the civilian population of Russia. It has been given immunity from prosecution.

The only legitimate prosecutors are the Palestinians, Lebanese, Iranians and Syrians for Israeli crimes committed against them.

So, all those celebrating and cheering the warrants issued against Netanyahu and Gallant should think carefully about what they are doing. Yes, those two are war criminals. Yes, they should be held accountable, but to the Palestinians and the Lebanese, the Syrians and Iranians. They are the ones who should be issuing warrants for their arrest, who should make them stand trial before the tribunals of those nations, as well as the leaders of the USA and the other nations who are parties to the Israeli crimes not this political farce called the ICC which is not a world court, which is not an independent judicial body capable of rendering justice, but a political tool of the West, used by the West for its own political and strategic reasons and objectives. The world is tired of the games of the ICC. The people of the world want real justice.

Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto. He is known for a number of high-profile war crimes cases and recently published his novel Beneath the Clouds. He writes essays on international law, politics and world events.

November 26, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

ICC a tool of ‘Western hybrid war’ – Moscow

RT | June 25, 2024

Moscow has denounced the Hague-based International Criminal Court’s (ICC) decision to issue arrest warrants for two top Russian defense officials, branding the institution a mere tool of the West’s “hybrid war” efforts.

The ICC on Tuesday issued arrest warrants for ex-Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu and the current chief of the General Staff, Valery Gerasimov, accusing the two of committing “alleged international crimes” amid the Ukrainian conflict.

Russia’s Security Council has denounced as “void” the court’s move, pointing out that its jurisdiction does not extend to Russia.

“The decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber of the ICC against the Secretary of the Russian Security Council Sergei Shoigu is void. This is just hot air, since the jurisdiction of the ICC does not extend to Russia, and [the decision] was made as part of the West’s hybrid war against our country,” the council said.

The two top military officials are accused by the ICC of committing “alleged international crimes,” namely “directing attacks at civilian objects,” as well as “causing excessive incidental harm to civilians” amid the Ukraine conflict. The charges stem from Russia’s campaign of strikes against Ukrainian energy infrastructure, which Moscow regards as dual-purpose strategic installations rather than purely civilian facilities.

Earlier this year, the ICC also targeted two top Russian military commanders, Lieutenant-General Sergey Kobylash of the Long-Range Aviation fleet and Admiral Viktor Sokolov of the Black Sea fleet. The charges against those commanders also resulted from the campaign of air strikes against Ukrainian infrastructure.

The Hague-based institution has taken multiple steps against Russia amid the Ukraine conflict, most notably by issuing an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin last spring. The president is accused of “unlawful deportation” of Ukrainian children to Russia.

Moscow, like many other countries, including the US, does not recognize the authority of the ICC and its actions hold no legal power in Russia.

June 25, 2024 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite | , | Leave a comment

Beware Benjamin Netanyahu’s ICC indictment

By Kit Klarenberg | Al Mayadeen | May 26, 2024

Many were understandably exhilarated when on May 20th, International Criminal Court prosecutor Karim Khan issued a statement outlining why he was seeking international arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and Security Minister Yoav Gallant, for “crimes against humanity” committed in Gaza since “at least” October 8th 2023.

To anyone who has been spectating the Gaza genocide in the wake of that fateful day, the roll-call of heinous charges leveled at Netanyahu and Gallant will hardly have been surprising. To have the details so forcefully spelled out by an international legal body was nonetheless astonishing. “Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare; willfully causing great suffering; willful killing; murder; intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population; extermination; persecution; inhumane acts.” The list goes on, and on.

Khan charged that these “crimes against humanity” were “committed as part of a widespread and systematic attack against the Palestinian civilian population, pursuant to State policy.” Moreso, these horrors, in the “assessment” of ICC prosecutors, “continue to this day.” The statement went on to note Khan’s office had collected extensive evidence, attesting that the Zionist entity “has intentionally and systematically deprived the civilian population in all parts of Gaza of objects indispensable to human survival.”

For the countless millions around the world who have marched, boycotted, or advocated in support of the Palestinian cause, or who have simply implored their elected representatives to take decisive action to halt the systematic, industrial-scale slaughter of the Palestinian people—while Gaza has been crucified—the ICC announcement surely provided some degree of relief. Yet, it must be remembered that “international justice” is at best a comforting fable, and at worst an outright fraud.

In a televised interview following Netanyahu’s indictment, Khan made a number of startling admissions. He revealed that while the ICC built cases against Israeli officials, he was threatened by numerous Western sources – including “elected leaders” – to back off. One “senior official” openly warned him that the Court was “built for Africans and thugs like Putin,” not the West and its allies. The veteran prosecutor stridently countered that the ICC had universal jurisdiction:

“We don’t view it like that. This Court is the legacy of Nuremberg. This Court should be the triumph of law over power and brute force!”

A cynic might suggest Khan was simply playing for the cameras. Given his professional history, he is uniquely well-placed to know the fundamentally hegemonic and discriminatory nature of “international justice”. Khan cut his teeth in the field during the late 1990s and early 2000s, as a senior legal advisor to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). It was set up to prosecute political and military officials in the region for war crimes and atrocities committed during Yugoslavia’s catastrophic breakup.

In theory, Bosniak, Croat, and Serb figures were all in the ICTY firing line. In practice, Serbs were targeted to a far greater degree and punished considerably more severely, than any other ethnicity in the former Yugoslavia. Some have argued this is reflective of and proportionate to the crimes committed during the brutal wars of the 1990s. Yet, anti-Serb bias – and a need to diminish the crimes of Washington’s Bosniak and Croat proxies – was hardwired into the Tribunal even before its inception.

A February 1993 CIA memo outlining “Yugoslavia policy options” proposed “establishing a war crimes tribunal”, for the express purpose of “publicizing Serbian atrocities.” It markedly warned against “even treatment of Bosniak transgressions,” which could be perceived regionally, and among US allies, as “tilting in Belgrade’s favor.” So it was that the ICTY was created three months later. It then spent the next 24 years convicting Serbs for grave crimes, up to and including genocide. Frequently, they were jailed for extremely lengthy periods amounting to life imprisonment.

Several of these convictions were secured via the highly controversial doctrine of “Joint Criminal Enterprise”, also derisively known as “Just Convict Everyone”. Under JCE’s terms, defendants can be guilty of crimes that they did not personally commit, approve of, or even know about at the time. By contrast, many Bosniak and Croat military and political figures who were indicted were acquitted or received extremely meager sentences, despite overwhelming evidence directly implicating them in the planning and commission of horrendous crimes against humanity.”

For example, consider Naser Oric, a Bosniak military commander. He had a fearsome reputation for taking no prisoners, torturing, mutilating, and murdering civilians and prisoners of war in the most repulsive ways imaginable. Moreover, he made no secret of this, to the extent of proudly showing Western journalists footage of his butchery. In July 1995, a Toronto Star reporter was given exclusive access to “a shocking video version of what might have been called Naser Oric’s Greatest Hits”:

“There were burning houses, dead bodies, severed heads, and people fleeing. Oric grinned throughout the video, admiring his handiwork. ‘We ambushed them,’ he said. The next sequence of dead bodies had been caused by explosives: ‘We launched those guys to the moon,’ he boasted. When footage of a bullet-marked ghost town appeared without any visible bodies, Oric hastened to announce. ‘We killed 114 Serbs there.’ Later there were celebrations, with singers with wobbly voices chanting his praises.”

General Philippe Morillon, who commanded UN peacekeeping forces in Bosnia in 1992/93, testified at the ICTY trial of Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevic, that Oric was responsible for “terrible massacres”, and openly “confessed to killing Bosnian Serbs every night.” Morillon had personally seen a mass grave filled with villagers slain by the Bosniak commander and his soldiers. However, the Tribunal only convicted Oric for failing to prevent the inhumane treatment of prisoners. He received a two-year sentence but was released immediately due to time served.

The sense the ICTY deliberately fudged Oric’s trial to insulate him from justice is ineluctable, and this was widely suspected at the time. A leaked 2006 diplomatic cable records how the head of Belgrade’s Tribunal liaison office, “normally a stalwart defender” of the ICTY, privately complained to US officials it was “becoming increasingly obvious” that Tribunal judgments were “politically driven.” Even local liberals who supported the prosecution of their former leaders were disturbed by the “vastly different treatment of Serb and non-Serb indictees.”

To this day, hardline Bosniak nationalists cite Oric’s ICTY exoneration as proof of his innocence, despite his self-avowed bloodlust. In this context, it must be remembered that the ICC is formally a successor to the Tribunal, and all that implies. Were the Court to ultimately acquit Netanyahu and Gallant of war crimes, the ruling would inevitably be cited ever after as a validation and justification of the Gaza genocide. And no doubt embolden and encourage Zionist entity military and political chiefs to – somehow – even greater savagery.

The unrelenting, perverse profusion of photo and video evidence of Israeli Occupation Forces perpetrating a 21st century Holocaust, combined with so many self-incriminating statements of Zionist entity officials, and intense public attention focused on the ICC as a result of South Africa’s pioneering case against ‘Tel Aviv’, no doubt gave the Court little choice but to indict Netanyahu and Gallant. The question of whether the pair will ever be in the ICC’s dock, let alone convicted for their monstrous deeds, remains an open one.

Until or unless Netanyahu and Gallant are convicted, we cannot place faith in the Court to ensure justice is done in Gaza. Even if the pair are rendered to the Hague for trial, there is no guarantee the ICC will be allowed to convict either, no matter the evidence against them. This is the bleak reality of an “international justice” system created explicitly and exclusively to prosecute “Africans and thugs like Putin”, not Western imperialist warlords, and their overseas proxies, puppets, and pets.

May 27, 2024 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , | 1 Comment

Samidoun statement on the International Criminal Court, the Resistance, and justice for Palestine

Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network | May 20, 2024

For years, the Palestinian people, at all levels of organization and struggle, have been demanding that the leaders of the Zionist regime are held accountable in international courts, including and especially the International Criminal Court, for their ongoing genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity in occupied Palestine. Today, on 20 May 2024, ICC prosecutor Karim Khan announced his intention to seek arrest warrants against not only the Zionist war criminals Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, but also against the Palestinian resistance leaders Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Deif and Ismail Haniyeh.

Let us be clear: There is no equation to be made between the legitimate resistance of the Palestinian people and its leadership, including Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Deif and Ismail Haniyeh, and the illegitimate Zionist colonizer. The attempt to equate victim and perpetrator is a fundamental injustice, not the pursuit of long-denied justice.

It is certainly true that the Palestinian resistance recognized this risk, especially given the powerful political interests involved and the track record of the ICC in prosecuting Africans and now, enemies of the imperialist West. In 2014, when the Palestinian Authority acceded to the Rome Statute, and again in 2024, the Palestinian resistance leadership, particularly Hamas, the Islamic Resistance Movement, has stated its openness to international investigations and its willingness to face the ICC if there is an attempt to meaningfully pursue justice against the occupiers and genocidaires of Palestine and their imperialist backers and accomplices.

However, the fact that the resistance is, as always, willing to sacrifice for Palestine, to be subjected to injustice so that their people may see freedom, does not make Khan’s actions any more just, acceptable or fair, nor does it make them legally valid.

Khan’s repeated references to the “rights” of Zionist colonizers, while failing to address Palestinian rights, as well as his legally invalid reference to the so-called “right of ‘Israel’ to defend itself,” when an occupier and colonizer has no right to defend itself against the people it is occupying and colonizing, highlight the ongoing bias of the ICC Prosecutor and his embrace of an imperialist framework for the operations of the Court. He made no mention of the right of the Palestinian people to resist and to liberate themselves through armed struggle, despite its broad support in international law.

It is, in fact, only because of the Resistance, because of the willingness of the resistance fighters, surrounded and nurtured by its popular cradle, that these arrest warrants for the Zionist war criminals are even being proposed and considered. It is the bravery, creativity and revolutionary steadfastness of the Palestinian people and their Resistance, including and particularly through the armed struggle, that has reset the balance of power to the extent that the crimes of the occupier can no longer be greeted with pure impunity.

Every legal achievement has been brought about not by the objective power or application of law, but by the shifting of reality brought about by the Palestinian armed struggle, accompanied by the regional and global forces of Resistance, especially the Lebanese resistance, the Yemeni armed forces, people, government and AnsarAllah movement, stretching through Iraq, Syria and Iran. It also speaks to the growing international popular cradle of the resistance, from student encampments to mass demonstrations to direct actions at arms manufacturers, that are making it clear that business as usual inside the imperial core is impossible so long as the genocide continues.

It is clear that 7 October changed the world. While Khan seeks to pretend that history began on 7 October and ignore the lengthy history of colonialism, ongoing Nakba and ongoing genocide since 1948, the Palestinian resistance made clear on 7 October that the horizon of true decolonization was opened in Palestine, that it was possible not only to imagine but to achieve a Palestine liberated from Zionism and a region liberated from imperialism.

The choice to seek warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant, while not against Benny Gantz, Gadi Eisenkot, Itamar Ben-Gvir, Isaac Herzog, Herzi Halevi and other war criminals, also indicates its bias toward appeasing the political leadership of imperialist powers. Of course, Netanyahu and Gallant are genocidal war criminals whose direction of the current genocide in Palestine cannot be overstated. They have the blood of over 40,000 Palestinians on their hands in just the past seven months alone.

However, the omissions seem to seek to clear the road for a Gantz (or other similarly affiliated) prime ministership of the Zionist regime. The fact that various imperialist powers, and even a significant sector of the Zionist security establishment, think that Netanyahu is not good for the future of the Zionist and imperialist project is not a secret; they believe that other figures are far more trustworthy to secure their prime colonial project in the region. They believe that Netanyahu is securing his own political future and protection from prosecution at the expense of the future of the Zionist project in the region, and this has been one of the major causes of the growing unrest and internal disarray within the “Israeli” regime.

The application for arrest warrants indicates that imperialist powers, including the United States and the European Union, are very worried about the future of the Zionist colony in the region and recognize that it is on the road to its defeat, removal and dissolution.

It must be noted that these imperialist powers, especially the United States, which has threatened a war if its leaders are indicted, refuse to be held accountable before the ICC, a fate they have traditionally deemed acceptable only for the targets of imperialism, especially Africans. The Zionist colonial project in Palestine has always been genocidal. Its existence is a war crime and a crime against humanity. The ICC prosecutor’s application for arrest warrants do not even begin to touch the magnitude of its crimes in Palestine.

These omissions are particularly egregious given that the ICC’s limited mandate in Palestine extends back to 2014, yet no crimes before 7 October 2023 are considered in Khan’s decision to seek these arrest warrants. This comes alongside the decision to charge three Palestinian leaders (of the legitimate resistance) as opposed to two Zionist officials (of the illegitimate settler colony and imperialist outpost), and to proffer eight charges against Palestinians, vs. seven against Zionists; and to fail to seek any charges under Article 6 of the Rome Statute, which covers genocide, against the Zionist war criminals.

It is particularly outrageous that while Khan seeks to charge Palestinian resistance leaders with “torture,” he has failed to seek any such charges against the Zionist regime, which is currently imprisoning and torturing over 9,400 Palestinian prisoners. Sixteen Palestinian prisoners’ martyrdom has been documented since 7 October 2023, while at least 27 Palestinians have been martyred in the concentration and torture camps for Palestinian civilians kidnapped from Gaza at Sde Teiman. Palestinian and international sources – and even Zionist whistleblowers – have repeatedly documented and exposed the horrific conditions, medical abuse, brutal torture, forced amputations and starvation being used against Palestinian detainees in both these concentration camps and the Zionist prison system. The photos of Palestinian detainees released after months in prison – such as those of Omar Assaf and Imad Barghouti – underline the level of mistreatment and torture that has become standard in the Zionist jails.

As a counter to the failure to seek to indict Gantz, his fellow members of the “war cabinet” and IOF chief Halevi – let alone all of the Zionist officials responsible for the crimes against humanity and genocide in Palestine since 2014, let alone 1948 — we see the indictment of Ismail Haniyeh, as a political leader of the Palestinian resistance. The pursuit of an indictment against Haniyeh appears to be an attempt to undermine Palestinian presence in current ceasefire negotiations and to add another level of pressure to the Palestinian resistance to accept permanent Zionist and imperialist occupation in Gaza.

It also makes clear that the indictments of Zionist war criminals are selective, while Palestinian resistance leadership is to be targeted in total. We have all confidence in the resistance’s willingness to sacrifice, ability to defend itself brilliantly in court and to win decisively in any fair trial.

The choice of charges against the resistance leaders (exceeding by one those against the Zionists in all cases), invoking numerous debunked and propagandistic Zionist claims, including “rape” and “extermination,” while failing to pursue charges of genocide and apartheid against the Zionist war criminals, further underlines this bias.

We all look forward to seeing Netanyahu and Gallant in the dock and appreciate this clear crack in the armor of impunity for the Zionist regime. We know that it is they who constantly travel around the world to receive billions of dollars in support from their imperial sponsors. At the same time, it is also clear that the ICC Prosecutor is not acting as a truly neutral party and is instead carrying out the directives of imperialist powers who would not accept any charges against the Zionist leadership without a “both sides” clause targeting the already criminalized and repressed Palestinian resistance. The equation of the indigenous resistance with the illegitimate colonizer is part of the minimization of genocide rather than its prosecution.

It is further clear that the ICC is not an institution into which we can place trust, as evidenced by its own history and failures to hold accountable any of those responsible for the horrific attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan, Libya and Syria; the starving of Venezuela through sanctions and blockades, the extraction of wealth in Africa, the attempted mass starvation and genocide in Yemen, the ongoing destabilization and destruction of Haiti.

The ICC has served for too long as a weapon of colonialism rather than a tribunal of justice. We trust the revolutionary justice of the victorious Palestinian people. There can be no equation of colonizer and colonized, of the executioner and the victim.

Glory and victory to the Palestinian resistance, to the Lebanese and Yemeni resistance, to all of the forces of resistance in the region and the world.

Imperialism and Zionism will be defeated, and from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.

May 20, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Progressive Hypocrite, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Dr. Ghassan Abu Sitta speaks to Al Mayadeen on EU entry ban

Al Mayadeen | May 5, 2024

Doctor Ghassan Abu Sitta, a renowned Palestinian Plastic and Reconstructive surgeon, detailed to Al Mayadeen his experience in France’s Charles De Gaulle International Airport, where French authorities stopped and turned him back on Saturday.

Dr. Abu Sitta flew to France to speak at the French Senate at the invitation of the Ecologists Party (The Greens), however, he was stopped and interrogated after arriving at Charles De Gaulle airport, to be later put on a flight back home. French authorities told Abu Sitta that he was barred from entering EU member states after German authorities banned him from the Schengen Area.

The surgeon volunteered with Doctors Without Borders in the Gaza Strip, working in the besieged territories hospitals amid a blatant Israeli genocide, which he bore witness to.

He told Al Mayadeen that the main reason why French authorities denied him entry to the country was to deny him access to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. The doctor was also scheduled to speak to authorities in the ICC, which is reportedly exploring issuing arrest warrants for Israeli war criminals, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In the interview, Abu Sitta underlined the political pressure that the ICC is being subjected to from the United States Congress, the Joe Biden administration, and the European governments abetting the Israeli regime’s war on Gaza.

In this context, the humanitarian said that a European political decision has been made, aiming to silence any witnesses of Israeli war crimes in Gaza. This policy comes in parallel with an Israeli decision to assassinate all other witnesses to the war crimes remaining in the Gaza Strip or held in detention, Abu Sitta explained.

Moreover, Abu Sitta pointed to collusion between Israeli and European officials, aimed at restricting the movement of witnesses to the Israeli genocide of Palestinians, specifically to international courts.

May 5, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, War Crimes | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The ICC: A Tool of Western Aggression

By Christopher Black – New Eastern Outlook – 09.03.2024 

The new charges made by the International Criminal Court against two Russian military officers, Sergey Kobylash, commander of the Russian Aerospace Forces’ Long-Range Aviation, and Russian Black Sea Fleet Commander Viktor Sokolov, reinforces the role of the ICC as a tool of Western propaganda and aggression and makes a mockery of its claimed role as an international court.

Mr. Khan, the latest iteration of ICC prosecutor, is a British lawyer who apparently never learned about the role of justice when he attended law school. His March 5th statement claims that the ICC has jurisdiction over Ukraine and Russia and that the officers charged directed attacks on civilian infrastructure, all of which is false. His political bias is established with the following statement,

“In our application for these warrants, my Office again underlined that these acts were carried out in the context of the acts of aggression committed by Russian military forces against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, which began in 2014.”

That statement is a bald-faced lie. It was not Russia that committed aggression against Ukraine in 2014. It was the United States, Britain, Canada, Germany, France and the other NATO allies who committed aggression against Ukraine and its people by staging a coup d’état in 2014; overthrowing the elected government and installing in its place a NATO puppet regime riddled with Nazis. That alone should shock the world. Yet in the West, nothing is said about it.  Many do not even know it took place. The facts have been suppressed and distorted by the propaganda they concocted to cover their crime of aggression, so they have labelled the brave resistance to the NATO-Nazi coup by the citizens of Ukraine located in the eastern provinces, as “Russian” aggression. Only a charlatan, having regard of all the facts, could come to that conclusion. It is the war begun by the Kiev regime against the Ukrainian people that Russia was finally forced to step in order to stop it.

But Mr. Khan seems undismayed that he will be labelled a charlatan, since this is the second set of charges he has filed against Russians, the first set being against President Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova, Russian Ombudswoman for Children’s Rights, some months ago.

The rapidity with which Mr. Khan has acted against Russia stands in stark contrast to the complete refusal by the ICC to lay charges against Israeli leaders and military officers for the genocide they are committing against the Palestinian people in the occupied territories, despite the fact on November 17, 2023 Mr. Khan, on receipt of referrals from South Africa and other states that Israel was committing war crimes, and crimes against humanity in the Occupied territories, as far back as 2006, stated that his office was investigating the matter. Yet, despite the International Court of Justice ruling that there is plausible evidence that Israel is committing genocide, despite the referrals from other nation states since then, as well as many individual complaints by world citizens and groups demanding charges be laid, he has done absolutely nothing. In effect, by his refusal to charge Israel leaders and officials, he aids and abets their actions by granting them immunity from prosecution.

Yet, in the case of Russia, over which the ICC has no jurisdiction, he acts with the utmost speed, ever ready to please his masters in the West, who need something, anything to pull the wool over the eyes of their citizens in the face of the great defeat they are suffering in their war against Russia in Ukraine. He is always ready to oblige them.

The fundamental problem of the ICC is that it is not a world court. It only claims to be, while representing the interests of the nations that promoted it, even the USA, which refuses to subject its citizens to its jurisdiction. It is a “court” to be used for western interests, no other. It was not created by a world government. It was created by a treaty drafted by representatives of a group of nations referred to as the Assembly of States Parties. The process of drafting the treaty was long and complex; however, it is necessary to point out that it is recognised that no single nation could purport to create such a court claiming to have international jurisdiction, and what a single nation cannot do, no group of nations, however composed, has the authority to create such an entity either.

The claim of the ICC to universal jurisdiction is a consequence of its ability to assume jurisdiction even in matters concerning individuals who are citizens of nation states that are not parties to the treaty. We have seen this with the charges laid against Russians for crimes allegedly committed in Ukraine. Neither Russia nor Ukraine is a Party to the Treaty of Rome, and therefore the ICC has no jurisdiction over the citizens of either state. However, the Ukrainian government, established by the NATO coup-d’état of 2014, invoked the Acceptance of Jurisdiction clause in the ICC Statute to afford the ICC with jurisdiction over Russia. Article 12 of the Statute states,

“Article 12

Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction

3. If the acceptance of a State, which is not a Party to this Statute, is required under paragraph 2, that State may, by declaration lodged with the Registrar, accept the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court with respect to the crime in question. The accepting State shall cooperate with the Court without any delay or exception in accordance with Part 9.”

This has two effects. Firstly, the phrase “crime in question” means that, in the case of Ukraine, for example, the ICC accepted a letter from the regime installed by the coup-d’état, granting the ICC limited jurisdiction-only over the alleged crime that was referred to the ICC by Ukraine. The crimes of Ukraine in the conflict, committed for ten years against the peoples of the Donbass and against civilians in Russia, are conveniently ignored. The Kiev regime states the ICC has no jurisdiction to consider them, and the ICC accepts this farce.

The result of accepting a letter of limited jurisdiction, that is a letter purporting to grant jurisdiction to the ICC over Russian “crimes,” while refusing to grant the ICC jurisdiction over Ukrainian crimes, is the selective prosecution of citizens of one state while granting immunity from prosecution of the other state. This is a legal and moral absurdity. The very idea of justice, in the sense of equality before the law, is negated, but more, it affords the Ukrainian regime an immunity from prosecution which provides encouragement to commit further crimes of its own on its claimed territories and in Russia. Once again, as in the Israeli case, we see that the ICC is acting as an enabler of war crimes instead of bringing to justice those committing them.

On May 21, 2023, the Russians charged the prosecutor and judges of the ICC for crimes involved in the issuance of the ICC warrants against Russians. The Russian Investigative Committee stated that,

“The ICC prosecutor is charged under part 2 of article 299, part 1 of article 30, and part of article 360 of the Russian Criminal Court (criminal prosecution of a person known to be innocent, as well as preparation for an attack on a representative of a foreign state enjoying international protection in order to complicate international relations). The judge is charged under part 2 of article 301, part 1 of article 30, and part 2 of article 360 of the Russian Criminal Court (knowingly illegal detention and preparation for an attack on a representative of a foreign state enjoying international protection in order to complicate international relations).”

“Both have been put on a wanted list.”

We can expect further charges to be laid against Mr. Khan and the judges concerned.

Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto. He is known for a number of high-profile war crimes cases and recently published his novel Beneath the Clouds. He writes essays on international law, politics and world events.

March 9, 2024 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite, Russophobia | , , | 1 Comment

ICC issues arrest warrants for top Russian military commanders

RT | March 5, 2024

The Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC) on Tuesday issued arrest warrants for Lieutenant-General Sergey Kobylash and Admiral Viktor Sokolov, accusing the two top Russian military commanders of committing war crimes amid the Ukrainian conflict.

The two top officers, serving as the commanders of Russia’s Long-Range Aviation and Black Sea Fleet respectively, are accused of committing “the war crime of directing attacks at civilian objects,” causing “excessive incidental harm to civilians,” as well as perpetrating a “crime against humanity,” the ICC said in a press release.

The alleged crimes are said to have taken place during a campaign of missile strikes “against the Ukrainian electric infrastructure from at least 10 October 2022 until at least 9 March 2023,” the court claimed.

The Hague-based tribunal has repeatedly taken hostile steps against Moscow amid the Ukraine conflict, most notably by issuing an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin last spring. Putin is accused of “unlawful deportation” of Ukrainian children to Russia.

Moscow has rebuffed the ICC claims, stating that the children in question were merely evacuated form the warzone, and could be returned to Ukraine should their legal guardians request it. Russia has also taken retaliatory steps against the ICC itself, launching a criminal case against the court’s principal prosecutor and judges, ultimately issuing arrest warrants against them.

Like many other countries, including the US, Moscow does not recognize the authority of the Hague-based tribunal and its actions have no legal validity in Russia. The body has been repeatedly accused of being Eurocentric and biased towards the West.

March 5, 2024 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite, Russophobia | , | 1 Comment

Is ICC still relevant? Not so, says Brazil’s Lula da Silva. And he is not alone

By Uriel Araujo | December 14, 2023

On December 4, Luis Inacio Lula da Silva, the President of Brazil (which has taken G20 presidency) said, after meeting with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz in Berlin, that he will invite Russian President Vladimir Putin to the G20 Summit that will take place in Brazil. Previously, Lula da Silva had stated Putin should not worry about being arrested, should he visit Brazil, despite the county’s membership in the International Criminal Court (ICC). The Brazilian leader later withdrew this promise but has maintained the invitation, thereby prompting a political controversy about the court in the Latin American country. On March 17, the Hague-based court issued a controversial arrest warrant for both Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova, Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights (of Russia) and for Putin, a ruling that has been praised by US President Joe Biden, among others.

Whenever people hear about the “International Crime Court”, they often assume it is some essential part of the fabric of international law. The court’s name, however, should not be taken at face value. It is true that about 124 countries are ratified state parties to the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC. It is also true, though, that 30 others have not yet ratified it, some of which have no intention of doing so. China, Russia, the US, India, Pakistan, Indonesia, and Turkey are not states parties – no Great Power in fact is a party to the ICC, unless one considers France, the UK and Germany as such. South Africa and the Philippines have already given formal notice of their intention to withdraw from the Statute, and so have Gambia and Burundi. Many other countries are considering doing so – which is not surprising at all.

Consider this: having been formed in 2002, with the exception of the Putin/Lvova-Belova warrant and the investigation on Rodrigo Duterte (former President of the Philippines), all other cases thus far launched by the court have been against Africans, including prominent regional leaders such as Muammar Gaddafi of Libya. It is no wonder then that over the last years the African Union has often accused the ICC of being biased against the continent. William Schabas (professor of international law at Middlesex Universit) summarized it: “Why prosecute post-election violence in Kenya… but not murder and torture of prisoners in Iraq or illegal settlements in the West Bank? Tony Blair, the former British prime minister and George W. Bush, the former American president… were never indicted by the ICC… in spite of the ample evidence available to justify legal proceedings against the two.”

In September, Brazil’s aforementioned President Lula da Silva had already questioned the value of a Hague-based court that does not include the US, Russia, or China. In his reasoning, the ICC cannot be that relevant, considering the fact that major powers do not submit themselves to its jurisdiction. Similarly, Flavio Dino, then the Brazilian Minister of Justice, described the court as “unbalanced”, saying that “it makes no sense to have a court that is only to judge some and not others”, even adding that his country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs could debate Brazil’s participation in the Statue.

As shown, Lula da Silva is not the only one who has doubts about the ICC and the controversies pertaining to the court have been around for a long time, way before its arrest warrant for Putin. Take the United States for instance. The US and the ICC have a peculiar record, to say the least. Back in 2002, President George W. Bush famously signed into law the so-called “Hague Invasion Act”, which in fact authorized the use of military force to liberate any American citizen being held by the ICC. More recently, it was described as a “kangaroo court” by former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo when President Donal Trump authorized sanctions against an ICC investigation into US war crimes in Afghanistan. Washington went so far as to threaten to arrest the court’s judges over the same issue.

However, in 2022, S.Res.546, a bipartisan, unanimous resolution by the US Senate (agreed to without amendment) came into being to support the ICC, which is quite remarkable, considering all the aforementioned record. It would seem the US is quite ready to applaud the Hague court, as long as it only persecutes its geopolitical rivals and never points its finger to any American war criminal – in this case Washington will literally threaten the court and its judges with arrest and invasion.

The ICC is predominantly funded by European states. The United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Australia, Spain (and also Japan) have long been among the court’s top 10 contributors. Moreover, it also receives contributions from private donors, such as large corporations. All of that throws some doubts on its credibility and impartiality as an international organ often accused (justifiably so) of having a pro-Western bias.

I wrote before about the dangerous trend of employing international lawfare as a geopolitical tool – as seen in Germany, where local courts have been invoking “universal jurisdiction” (over some crimes) to convict Syrian authorities accused of having committed torture in Syria. This development was applauded by many, including Wolfgang Kaleck, founder of the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), who described it as a step towards bigger  things.

One could very well ask how big it can get. We know that torture and sexual abuse were and have been common place in CIA-operated bases overseas as well as in places such as Guantánamo Bay (Cuba), and Abu Ghraib (Iraq). We also know Biden admittedly authorized the infamous August 29 drone strike in Kabul that killed civilians only. His predecessor Donald Trump in turn ordered the illegal assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani, who was on a peace mission. Even so, it is hard to imagine a top CIA official (or Biden and Trump themselves for that matter) being investigated by a German court – or by the ICC.

From a perspective informed by legal realism and political realism, one could reason that the very way a country’s judicial systems’ “universal jurisdiction” can be exercised is limited by certain conditions regarding political, economic, and military power. The same limitations apply to the ICC. To sum it up, it is about geopolitics as much as it is about international law. The ICC today is a reflection of the inequalities between countries in today’s architecture of international law.

December 14, 2023 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries