{
  "id": 328313,
  "title": "Washington’s War on the International Criminal Court Is a Gift to the Kremlin",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/07/24/washingtons-war-on-the-international-criminal-court-is-a-gift-to-the",
  "topic": "world",
  "section": "World",
  "published": "2026-07-24T15:00:21.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "The Moscow Times - Opinion",
    "slug": "the-moscow-times-opinion",
    "url": "https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2026/07/24/washingtons-war-on-the-international-criminal-court-is-a-gift-to-the-kremlin-a93310"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "On July 13, the Trump administration announced its intention to \"dismantle\" the International Criminal Court (ICC), a move that has drawn parallels to past U.S. hostility towards the court. President Vladimir Putin, for whom the ICC has issued an arrest warrant, must have rejoiced at the news. The U.S. has long opposed the ICC, with the George W. Bush administration refusing to become a party to the Rome Statute in 2002. Congress subsequently passed the \"Hague Invasion Act\" to authorize the president to secure the release of U.S. or allied personnel detained by the Court.\n\nThe current administration has escalated the hostility, sanctioning ICC officials over the Afghanistan investigation and imposing further sanctions in 2025 on ICC prosecutors and judges. These actions not only target individuals but also create a chilling effect, prohibiting U.S. citizens from providing funds, goods, or services to or for the benefit of designated ICC personnel.\n\nThe U.S. cannot legally abolish the ICC, but it can attempt to make it inoperable by leveraging the global reach of the dollar and American financial and communications infrastructure. Though it cannot directly abolish the court, the U.S. is aiming to render it ineffective. The political attacks on the ICC have escalated beyond mere criticism, lending themselves more to a declaration of war.\n\nHowever, the administration has not provided a clear casus belli for this escalation. No current ICC investigation targets U.S. officials or military personnel. The office of the prosecutor recently closed the Venezuela II preliminary examination but will focus on alleged crimes by the Taliban and Islamic State–Khorasan Province in the Afghanistan investigation.\n\nThe legal arguments presented for this campaign are essentially the U.S.'s familiar \"fundamental objections\" to the ICC. But these arguments do not survive even a basic reading of the Rome Statute. The U.S. is not a party to the Statute, but that does not prevent Americans from being arrested or prosecuted on the territory of a party state. The ICC may exercise less jurisdiction than national courts, but it remains a significant international criminal court.\n\nAs a Russian lawyer, I am reminded of the Russian officials' previous dismissal of international courts as politicized institutions interfering with national sovereignty. Russia rejected the ICC's Ukraine investigation, arguing that Russia was not a party to the Rome Statute. However, the Court's jurisdiction over crimes committed on Ukrainian territory rested on Ukraine's status as a state party. Russia's non-membership does not grant it immunity from the Court's jurisdiction. Russia has also taken legal and intimidation measures against ICC officials, criminalizing assistance to the ICC and even adopting its own version of the Hague Invasion Act.",
  "summary": "I watched Moscow dismiss international courts as politicized institutions interfering with national sovereignty. America learned the wrong lesson.",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}