Hey folks! Marcus Here! I must say that when I saw the headlines on Wednesday and after I read the article, I told myself, There you go! U.S. “Exceptionalism” at his best? Then, I remembered that our second class according to the syllabus is on U.S. National Sovereignty and International Security: unilateralism vs multilateralism. This incident was definitely timely and most welcome. Needless to say that this is not the first time the U.S. has conducted unilateral sanctions against countries or high ranking officials of institutions, or better still taking measures without consulting those involved, and/or third parties.
So in the article, we can see that the sanctions are primarily aimed at Fatou Bensouda, the ICC prosecutor, and the Head of the Prosecutor’s Jurisdiction, Complementary, and Cooperation Division, Phakiso Mochochoko. But the sanctions go beyond these two people. By freezing their assets, the sanctions have “a chilling effect on non-US banks and other companies outside of US jurisdiction who fear losing access themselves to the US banking system if they do not help the US to effectively export the sanctions measures.”
Given the article is from the Human rights Watch, I must warn you that it was written with “strong words”. I understand that the U.S. is not part of the ICC, and that back in 2018, when the ICC wanted to investigate the U.S. on allegedly committed crimes in Afghanistan, John Bolton who was then National Security Adviser said that “we will not cooperate with the ICC” and that “for all intents and purposes, the ICC is already to us.” But I’m just curious to know how will the U.S. officials take the criticisms of Richard Dicker, international justice director at Human Rights Watch when he says, “The Trump administration’s perverse use of sanctions, devised for alleged terrorists and drug kingpins, against prosecutors seeking justice for grave international crimes, magnifies the failure of the US to prosecute torture,” and that, “The administration’s conjuring up a ‘national emergency’ to punish war crimes prosecutors shows utter disregard for the victims.”
I look forward to hearing you thoughts and comments!
Thanks, Marcus, for this interesting and provocative blog post. There has been deep antipathy towards the ICC that goes back long before the Trump administration. But it has been taken to a new level during the last four years–and especially with the recent action you describe. In this case, it’s not just the “allergy” that Trump, Bolton, Pompeo and others in the administration have towards anything multilateral. They see the ICC as a direct threat to US unilateral action, which they maintain is essential to help maintain world peace. And I quite agree with you about the perverse use of sanctions in this case; this is NOT what they were intended for! — Professor Wallerstein