U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio says the United States in general and the Trump administration specifically should not have to answer to the International Criminal Court.
Rubio wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal July 13 explaining why the Trump administration seeks to dismantle the ICC, which was formed in 2002 under the Rome Statute with jurisdiction to prosecute individuals for international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression.
While Rubio takes aim at the entire structure of the ICC — “Americans never agreed to any of this” — he specifically complains at criticism of the Trump administration’s deportation tactics, which have been roundly condemned at home and abroad.
The examples he cites concern actions taken by the first and second Trump administrations.
“In 2020 the ICC launched an investigation into what chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda of Gambia described as ‘war crimes by members of the United States armed forces’ in Afghanistan, declaring that the U.S. government hadn’t prosecuted enough American soldiers to satisfy the court,” he wrote. “In effect, Ms. Bensouda was anointing herself the final judge of U.S. military policy and the entire U.S. justice system.”
And then this: “In the second Trump administration, these calls have continued to grow. Last year, major activist groups urged high-ranking international officials ‘to take immediate and meaningful action’ against the Trump administration’s deportations of violent criminals to El Salvador. Months later, a former ICC chief prosecutor declared that President Trump’s strikes against narcoterrorists amounted to ‘a crime against humanity’ and should be treated as such under international law — a line that was echoed by United Nations leaders, and major leftist nongovernmental organizations, Democratic Party officials and politicians.”
All the examples Rubio mentions are highly contested by Trump’s critics at home and internationally. Rubio echoes the sentiments of the John Birch Society from decades ago in complaining about the power of the United Nations.
Rubio — who is effectively ruling Venezuela after Trump unilaterally deposed its government — says the ICC threatens national sovereignty.
“The ICC is backed and run by a powerful network of leftist nongovernment organizations, smug globalists and hostile Third World governments united by their enmity toward the U.S.,” he wrote.
Rubio — who is effectively ruling Venezuela after Trump unilaterally deposed its government — says the ICC threatens national sovereignty.
If the ICC continues, “it would mean the death of the U.S. as a sovereign and independent nation,” he wrote. “Our decision and our people would be at the mercy of the ICC and its collaborators in the ‘international community.’ To accept the ICC is to surrender control of our national destiny.”
One of the groups cited by Rubio as being part of the problem immediately pushed back with its own statement.
Democracy for the Arab World Now, known as DAWN, accused Rubio of trying to cover up international crimes committed by the Trump administration in the Middle East.
“In March, DAWN wrote to all states impacted by the regional war — including Iran, Israel, Lebanon and states in the Gulf — calling on them to accept ICC jurisdiction, so that all its citizens and all victims have a pathway to justice with no exceptions,” said Omar Shakir, DAWN’s executive director. “Rubio’s mischaracterization of our call to investigate all possible war crimes carried out in the war — focusing solely on the US’ actions in Iran — begs the question: Is the secretary of state worried because he knows U.S. personnel committed war crimes in Iran?”
Raed Jarrar, DAWN’s advocacy director, added: “When the world’s most powerful country aims to dismantle the world’s only permanent international court, it sends the message that the powerful are above the law. It is not the ICC that Rubio is dismantling brick by brick but the rules-based international order that grew out of the ashes of World War II.”