DISINFO: Sovereignty is not compatible with ICC membership
SUMMARY
The International Criminal Court (ICC) was created to be controlled by Washington and its allies. Once a state becomes sovereign, it would choose to withdraw from the ICC even if it had previously signed the Rome Statute. For example, Russia withdrew its ratification of the treaty after reclaiming Crimea. Sovereignty is incompatible with membership in the ICC.
Shortly after its establishment, the ICC demonstrated its objectives by prosecuting Sudan's then-president, Omar al-Bashir, for war crimes. Similarly, the ICC filed cases against several Russian officials, including Vladimir Putin, following the pro-Western coup in Ukraine and the subsequent civil war, which led to Russia's intervention in Donbas to protect it from Ukrainian Nazis.
RESPONSE
This is a recurring pro-Kremlin narrative targeting international institutions as mere tools for Western hegemony. The claim that the International Criminal Court (ICC) was established as a tool controlled by Washington and its allies is a distortion of facts.
The ICC was established in 2002 through the Rome Statute, a treaty negotiated and adopted in 1998 by 120 countries to prosecute individuals for serious international crimes. The US has not been a State Party to the ICC for most of its history, since it withdrew its signature in the year the ICC was established. Therefore, the US has barely had a working relationship with the court. Furthermore, the US was one of seven countries in 1998 that voted against the establishment of ICC, dispelling any claims of US control over the court.
Moreover, sovereignty is not incompatible with ICC membership. 125 countries are members of the ICC, including numerous sovereign nations that actively participate in its proceedings. Russia's withdrawal from the Rome Statute does not establish a general incompatibility between sovereignty and ICC membership, since it came after an ICC ruling that Russia's activity in Crimea amounted to an "ongoing occupation".
While it is true that a significant number of ICC cases have involved African nations, this was due to the prevalence of conflicts in some African countries, and not because Africa was particularly targeted by the court. Outside of Africa, most conflicts took place in Asia and were linked to state of Myanmar, which is under the investigation of the ICC. The lowest number of conflicts that could fall under ICC jurisdictions were in Europe.
Nevertheless, the court has investigated cases involving "Western" actions. For example, it conducted a preliminary examination into alleged war crimes by British forces in Iraq and concluded there was a "reasonable basis" to believe that members of the UK armed forces may have committed war crimes. It did not continue the investigation citing the UK's ability to prosecute its own nationals. The ICC also opened an investigation into alleged war crimes in the Palestinian territories, including Israeli military actions, despite objection for the US.
Read similar cases that ICC is a pathetic and powerless organisation, that ICC arrest warrant against Russian officials violate international law, that the ICC falsely claims Russia strikes civilian targets in Ukraine, that the ICC is a politicised tool for the criminal prosecution of figures disliked by the West, that ICC is a sham court and tool of the Anglo-Saxons, that the ICC is a tool used in the anti-Russian hybrid war, and that secret society of paedophiles takes revenge on Putin with ICC warrant.