US applies pressure on multilateralism

The US, viewing its sovereignty as above reproach, seeks to delegitimize the relevance of the ICC and other international institutions. 

Background

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is a permanent international tribunal located in The Hague in the Netherlands. The ICC seeks to “bring to justice the perpetrators of the worst crimes known to humankind – war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide,” especially when national courts are unable or unwilling to do so. Instituted by the Rome Statute, states become party to the institution following ratification of the multilateral treaty in their domestic judicial architecture. The ICC is meant to complement existing national judicial systems and therefore may exercise its jurisdiction under certain conditions. 125 nations are currently party to the Rome Statute and 44 individuals have been indicted in the ICC.

The United States is not party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Simultaneously, the US has maintained a number of positions regarding the ICC. President Bill Clinton signed the Rome Statute in 2000, although President George W. Bush informed the court that the US no longer intended to ratify the Statute in 2002. The Bush administration believed that Americans may be treated unfairly for political reasons, although once John Bolton had left the administration, the US ceased its active opposition of the court. The Obama administration partially reversed this policy, endorsing the prosecution of leaders such as Joseph Kony. However, the US has continued to circumvent the jurisdiction of the ICC, holding that no party can sit above US institutions in an assertion of its sovereignty.  

Analysis

On March 15, 2019, US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo announced that the US will revoke or deny visas to anyone connected with ICC probes into alleged US military abuses in Afghanistan. In 2017, the ICC’s chief prosecutor requested permission to open a probe in Afghanistan after preliminary evidence was found indicating rape and torture were committed by US troops and CIA operatives in secret detention facilities both in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Mr. Pompeo said that the move would ensure that American and allied military personnel are protected from “living in fear of unjust prosecution for actions taken to defend our great nation.”

John Bolton, US national security advisor, has been a longtime critic of international institutions, including the UN and the ICC. His work to weaken the court during his tenure in the Bush administration was laid bare by diminished opposition to the ICC by the administration following his departure. Mr. Bolton views the court as a “freewheeling global organization” backed by countries that seek to check American power. In his first speech as Donald Trump’s national security advisor, Mr. Bolton said, “We will let the ICC die on its own. After all, for all intents and purposes, the ICC is already dead to us.”

The move comes amidst a concerted effort by President Trump’s administration against multilateral institutions. Mr. Bolton views US unilateralism as the only way to secure its interests and ensure peace for its allies. The campaign remains true to President Trump’s animosity towards a global climate pact. Amidst a period of trade wars, the Trump administration has “paralyzed” the World Trade Organization. Greater support for Israel has led to a withdrawal of financial assistance to the UN refugee agency for Palestine, UNRWA. We believe that this trend is likely to continue, an assessment endorsed by Mr. Pompeo on March 15 who said that the US was willing to take additional measures against the ICC if it did not “change course,” including adopting economic sanctions.

Counterpoint

Human Rights activists have taken a contrary position to Mr. Bolton. Arguing that the Trump administration is “more concerned with demonizing the ICC that with bringing war criminals to justice,” these activists contend that such sanctions delegitimize the court and the legitimacy of US sanctions itself. A director at Human Rights Watch said the ban was a “blatant attempt to bully judges,” while shielding the US from facing consequences for its untoward actions.

Assessment

Our assessment is that the visa ban is part of a larger move by the Trump administration against international insertions and multilateral institutions. We believe that such assaults by the administration are likely to continue under the tutelage of John Bolton. 

Image Courtesy - Hypergio [CC BY-SA 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)]