Recent years have seen a rise in BS institutions. There is the International Association of Genocide Scholars, an organization that suddenly rose to prominence last year when it was reactivated to accuse Israel of “genocide” in Gaza; there is the International Court of Justice (ICJ), a politicized pseudo-court that seems determined to accelerate this same genocide claim; there is the United Nations Human Rights Council, whose only standing single-country agenda item concerns, yes, the Jewish state; and the list goes on.
But the institution that should win all the accolades for not being what it claims to be is the International Criminal Court (ICC). Founded in 2002, the ICC has served as a political tool for a quarter of a century. In the 2000s, European signatories regularly criticized the administration of George W. Bush for not having accepted that the United States become a member of the new institution. But the Bush administration took the view that every Democratic and Republican administration before and since has taken: No American statesman or soldier should ever have his or her actions judged under the jurisdiction of a foreign court. American justice is enough.
Many Europeans view this as evidence of American barbarism. Why would the United States refuse to recognize the jurisdiction of something as noble as the ICC? The reasons, over the years, have become very clear. To take just one notable example, in 2002, when the court was established, Spanish judge Baltasar Garzón sought to call former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger as a witness in an investigation into human rights violations committed by South American military dictatorships. Garzón wanted to question Kissinger about what the U.S. government knew about these alleged abuses. Authorities in Britain, where Kissinger was living at the time, rejected the request. But the incident served as an important reminder: If the United States ever submitted to a foreign court, international or foreign criminal jurisdiction could and would be used against America and its allies.
That’s why, late last week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio brought U.S. opposition to the ICC to a crisis point. new level: sanction American individuals or companies that conduct transactions with the court. As Rubio said in a statement issued on social media: “We will prohibit transactions with this rogue court, cutting off their resources and crippling their ability to operate against us because our message is clear: the United States and the American people are not subject to the jurisdiction of this fake ICC. »
Gn world
