14 ms·

"Without commenting on ongoing cases, he called on European authorities to activate a mechanism that could limit the impact of US restrictions." --------------

• bawolff 10mo ago
  > Sadly, I fear that the U.S. may have need of such a defence relatively soon. When it really comes down to it, usa is a super power. Might makes right in international politics. The ICC has had quite a lot of successes when it comes to small and even medium sized countries, but at some point pragmatism has to win out. Nobody is going to war with the USA on behalf of the ICC. I highly doubt the ICC is going to push any issue with america unless the evidence against them is extreme. Its simply not powerful enough.
  • giva 10mo ago
    Meet the "Hague Invasion Act": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pr...
    • mytailorisrich 10mo ago
      Considering the relations between the US and the Netherlands it is inconceivable that the Dutch government would allow US military personel to be detained that way on its soil, and if that did happen I think a call from the White House would "clear any misunderstandings"...
      • amarcheschi 10mo ago
        Given the current us government, I would not be surprised if it happened instead
      • ben_w 10mo ago
        Until last year, sure. Trump's been doing a lot of "inconceivable" things with the US's international relations.
        • mytailorisrich 10mo ago
          Nothing has changed. The Netherlands are staying on the straight and narrow even if they might blow hot air under the guise of "EU solidarity", and that gets them cushty NATO jobs, too ;)
          • ben_w 10mo ago
            Trump's threatening the sovreignty of two NATO members while also being skeptical of the value of keeping the US itself in NATO and suggesting the US won't defend any NATO member that gets attacked.
            • mytailorisrich 10mo ago
              Maybe so but that does not change a thing to the bilateral relation between US and Netherlands... which is as tight as can be, shall we say, we've seen it as recently as October with Nexperia.
            • Nicook 10mo ago
              Bluffing and theater are not reality and should not be confused for it.
              • ben_w 10mo ago
                Shouldn't, yes. Trump himself makes this difficult. He has already done things that a reasonable outsider would expect to be mere bluffs. And also TACO'ed backwards, turning things he's done into, effectively, theatrics.
    • anthk 10mo ago
      Invade The Hague, and the next you see it's the whole US bases' set kicked out from Europe and potential Russian/Chinese missiles in Cuba pointing to Silicon Valley. And OFC Wall Street heading down faster than in 1929. Fucking up your main client would yield a disaster so huge to the US economy than no war would save them. If any, they would be fucked, because the EU might even temporally ally with Russia. Then the shit would hit the fan in Alaska. Your army it's the best in the world? Say hello to a coallition between Europe-China-Russia. No one would dare to throw any single atomic bomb because the outcome would be MAD for everyone. The US would attempt then to invade Mexico/Canada. But that would yield to its own people siding up with Canada and Mexico against an obvious corrupt US war-machine-corporate state, up to the point to getting former Mexican territory back to Mexico. Texas and California might have declared indepent countries themselves to avoid any war. The smart move, you know.
      • throwaway3060 10mo ago
        There is no circumstance under which a unified EU would temporarily ally with Russia against the US.
        • anthk 10mo ago
          Under an invasion you can expect anything. I've seen far right regimes in Europe -Spain- siding up with the Communist Cuba because of the common backgrounds over politics. And the Cuban regime itself under Castro mourning over Franco's death. As crazy as it sounds. Under an US-invaded European Union Spain would team up with Cuba and Venezuela the first day no matter which party would be ruling, left or even neocon-close right. The Spaniard state's survival would be the top priority. No state, no economy, no Ibex 35. And shit would hit the fan from Latin America too. Oh, and expect hell with guerrillas spawning here and there from Latin America backed up from Europeans and maybe the Moccromafia and the former Italian Mafia themselves. Spain, France and Italy have contacts over all the Mediterranean and you knows what Mediterranean means. I wouldn't be there if I were an American trying to invade Europe... because once you kick the wasp nest of the Islamic regimes being generously supported from Mafias, you would have both the Jihad and the Narcoguerrillas at home with European army support. Try to stop that. Because something the Southern Europeans know well it's learning to have friends even in Hell "just in case". Spain has the Hispano-spehere, they know how to put a whole political spectra on its side with ease, and the French have the Francophonie. And for sure they have contacts in the Arabic world as I said. If they don't have a badass archive of ETA contacts with Islamic camps beforehand, and they own the triumph card of Marbella too. You would be nuts trying to invade some sickos there; they know who to call in case of emergencies. The Spanish state already did that against terrorists themselves.
  • Hikikomori 10mo ago
    USAs superpower is their inability to see their own hypocrisy.
    • eptcyka 10mo ago
      Hypocrisy is an argument losers make. Might makes right.
      • roenxi 10mo ago
        Yes and no, there is a bit more to it. When dealing with democracies hypocrisy tends to actually harm the people practising it to some extent. If a polity insists on living in a fantasy rather than reality the political process will start optimising for outcomes in that fantasy world rather than reality. It is quite funny watching US politics where the voter base are unprincipled and opportunistic in how they vote then get hoist on their own petard when they get leadership that reflects their voting patterns. It is also interesting to think how effective a country could be if the voter base tended to be honest and forthright. With enough power people would rather accept bad in-practice results rather than have to confront the fact that they screwed up. So in practice the people in power don't usually care about hypocrisy. But they would be materially better off if they had actually cared about it. It is a bit like the oligarchs in some traditional communist country. Living the lie got them lifestyles of unbelievable wealth and luxury - but the oligarchs in the capitalist countries got lifestyles of even more unbelievable wealth and luxury, and passed on a much more impressive legacy. Not to say they weren't still hypocritical, but the degree of the disconnect from reality matters. If you keep your eye on the places where hyper-competent people gather and accumulate power they tend to actually be quite honest. Organised groups of talented people tend to have the easiest time securing a social advantage when honesty and straightfowardness are abundant. The people who would naturally be socially weak are the ones who rely on saying one thing and doing the opposite.
        • tormeh 10mo ago
          For individuals, there's often a strong incentive to display certain beliefs, and the easiest way to do that consistently is to internalise them. The cost of voting for a bad party to you personally is zero. In other words, the government is a commons, and anyone can abuse it without consequence, but when we all do it...
  • anal_reactor 10mo ago
    Yes but the thing about power is the more you use it the more the other party learns to live without it. US has such a giant leverage over Europe because Europe believed US would never actually use its power against it. Imagine US sanctioning Chinese officials - they would shrug at best because China has its own everything because they always knew US would bully them. The consequence is that Europe will slowly move its financial and IT systems away from US solutions. It's a very, very slow process because it was believed for almost a century that US wouldn't actually bully Europe. But for example, there will be more pressure to roll out Wero and have the systems completely European. Before Trump, there was decent chance the whole thing would be just Visa/MasterCard with extra steps. Now it's clear that EU needs its own independent payment system.
  • mrexcess 10mo ago
    >Might makes right in international politics. But the whole point of Nuremberg was to prevent this, the whole idea of international law was meant to prevent this. The judges of Nuremberg warned us about this outcome. In a world where human rights are not respected, why would we think that the Jewish people are anything but disadvantaged? Have we forgotten the important parts of history, in our urgency to prevent it repeating? If might makes right, you've already accepted that the world belongs to China.
    • embedding-shape 10mo ago
      I kind of feel like if one of the superpowers always been against international law although trying to enforce it on others, and not really wanting to participate in ICC in any shape of form, already made the whole idea dead in the water. Lots of people realize the importance of this, but if the country who plays world police doesn't want to collaborate on making it reality and they literally still perform violent actions against other sovereign states without repercussions, what is the purpose?
      • lucketone 10mo ago
        What you say is true, but idealists should not give up just because a murderer exists. While it will not control the murderer, it can and will influence it (violence going 10% down is better than 0%)
        • MangoToupe 10mo ago
          > violence going 10% down is better than 0% This is also what protection payments look like on paper; surely we can reduce violence much more. I say: let every country have nukes, or let no country have them. This halfway bullshit is worse than either.
        • coldtea 10mo ago
          >While it will not control the murderer, it can and will influence it (violence going 10% down is better than 0%) Idealists create worse outcomes than realists and pragmatists. Violence going down 10% can be worse than it going down 0%, if the difference comes from reducing counter-violence done by the oppressed - and reducing based on the agenda and whims of the big time abusers responsible for a big chunk of the other 90%.
  • throw310822 10mo ago
    Europe isn't a superpower but it's a giant entity with 450 million people and 15% of the world's gdp. It has the means to oppose the US and retaliate against its sanctions, if it doesn't it's because of the cowardice of its politicians and the weakness of its institutions.
    • embedding-shape 10mo ago
      More importantly, the bilateral relationship between the US and Europe represents 30% of global trade, and 40% of the global GDP. Both economies complement each other naturally (at least right now), and neither partners don't want it to end, so even with the relationship becoming more fragile as the US tries to close itself off from the world, I think both will still try to remain collaborative with each other, regardless of this posturing that is going on.
      • ben_w 10mo ago
        It will take a lot to shift that trade dynamic, but the current US administration seems quite energetic about rapidly tearing down Chesterton's Fences that it doesn't understand nor want to spend the time to understand, so I'd not bet on this remaining so even for the next 3 years. And yes, I do understand how utterly bonkers it is to suggest something this big changing over just 3 years.
        • tormeh 10mo ago
          I don't believe this is possible, even at Trump speed. It's much easier to wreck NATO than to reshape the world economy to that extent.
          • ben_w 10mo ago
            Indeed, but it's not impossible for him to simply wreck the economy faster than it can be correctly reshaped.
            • 10mo ago
  • pfdietz 10mo ago
    Where ICC could win against someone in the US is if the opposition comes to power in the US and does nothing to protect that person. "Oh gosh, bounty hunters grabbed them and smuggled them out of the country? What a shame."
  • expedition32 10mo ago
    One of the things that made America a superpower is "soft power". Continuing to piss off their allies will eventually blow back if the US ever needs something from the UN. Or worse they may need that French aircraft carrier if war breaks out with China.
    • kyboren 10mo ago
      The US is under no illusion that France of all countries will go to bat for the US in a Pacific war. And Macron has made clear that they will not: https://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/france-president-macron-says-europe-must-not-follow-the-us-china-on-taiwan https://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/france-president-m...
  • youhatetheleft 10mo ago
    Im sorry the latter part of the 20th century was all about trying to avoid the whole might makes right mindset and in international politics it still should be. Wasn’t the whole justification for the west supporting Ukraine that might shouldn’t make right? The fact that people have just swallowed the might make right narrative just shows what kind of a dire situation we are in when it comes to international politics and how far standards have fallen since 2001.
    • bawolff 10mo ago
      > the latter part of the 20th century was all about trying to avoid the whole might makes right mindset and in international politics it still should be Just because you try to do something doesn't mean you succeed. The way the world ought to be is not the same as the way the world is. > Wasn’t the whole justification for the west supporting Ukraine that might shouldn’t make right? Which involved buying them weapons in order to make them mighty. And lets be real, there are plenty of other conflicts in the world that nobody gives a shit about (just look at africa). The real reason Ukraine is getting support is that its geographically right next to europe and having them not be controlled by Russia is strategically valuable to western interests. Having Russia wear itself out in Ukraine is also strategically valuable.
      • youhatetheleft 10mo ago
        People like you make me sick. No wonder we are racing towards a third world war.
  • mikewarot 10mo ago
    >When it really comes down to it, usa is a super power. It was a superpower, until Trump got back in office. He's been taking an axe to US soft power, and our institutions in general. We're on the edge of losing Global reserve currency status. That's what's driving the re-monetization of Silver and Gold.
  • mikkupikku 10mo ago
    Nobody needs to go to war with America on behalf of the ICC. We merely need member nations to declare they won't enforce any American sanctions against ICC judges or other personnel. The US might cry and stamp their feet, maybe even threaten to invade France, but this is all impotent rage if the EU decides to wake up and call America's stupid bluffs.
    • SpicyLemonZest 10mo ago
      I don't think that's accurate. Which sanctions, specifically, would become ineffective if Emmanuel Macron stood up and said "Our government won't enforce this sanction against ICC judges or other personnel"?
      • tensor 10mo ago
        If the sanctioned individuals can still use French that would make the "debanking" sanction much less effective.
        • SpicyLemonZest 10mo ago
          Would it? The source article doesn't say that he's unable to find a French bank account. The practical "debanking" problems it describes - some non-American banks won't do business with a person under American sanctions, all payment card systems popular in Europe are American - aren't subject to the French government's enforcement or lack thereof.
          • pixl97 10mo ago
            >all payment card systems popular in Europe are American - aren't subject to the French government's enforcement or lack thereof. I disagree. Tomorrow France can tell Visa/MC/Banks they must service ICC judges or lose the ability to bank in their country and suddenly said providers will be concerned about the predicament they are in. The EU better pull its head out of its ass about following everything the US does at this point. It's obvious over here in the states things have gone off the rails, and they'll go down with us if they want to remain so tightly coupled.
  • coldtea 10mo ago
    The Roman Empire was a superpower too, until it made too many stupid mistakes not dissimilar to modern ones.
  • ycombinary 10mo ago
    [flagged]
  • Teever 10mo ago
    They don’t have to go to war. The ICC can just try these people in absentia and then once they’re found guilty put bounties out on them like Osama Bin Laden.
  • zyngaro 10mo ago
    Might is right is the norm everywhere at every level not only international politics. The corrolary is that democracy and human rights are a joke.
    • dxdm 10mo ago
      > Might is right is the norm everywhere at every level not only international politics. The corrolary is that democracy and human rights are a joke. You are quite wrong, of course, as any reasonably informed observer will know. Whether you're just ignorant or ill-intentioned: It's so easy to fire off these poisonous comments whose effect is to undermine and deligitimize the norms and institutions that keep things reasonably okay, as imperfect as they are. I hope you will never have to yourself experience the difference that you so easily dismiss.
      • curiousviber 10mo ago
        I used to believe this, but looking at the history of "israel", the genocides constantly committed in the middle east, etc. It's obvious that your logic would just be legitimizing the current might. Would your logic apply to all the people of Gaza, would them resisting qualify as "undermine and deligitimize the norms and institutions that keep things reasonably okay" Is genocide reasonably ok?
        • dxdm 10mo ago
          > Is genocide reasonably ok? Of course not, and nothing I wrote leads to that conclusion. Rejecting the notion that "everywhere at every level not only international politics... democracy and human rights are a joke" does not mean that things are non-horrible everywhere, at every level. Having a way for the public to regularly and non-violently change leadership and lawmakers, having checks and balances between the holders of power, and certain norms we strive towards is the only thing that gives us a chance at preventing authoritarian, absolutist and arbitrary rule - within the constraints where these things have effect. That they do not work everywhere and do not work perfectly is a sign that we continue to need them. Concluding the opposite, that they're entirely useless, is not only dangerously foolish and fatalistic, but also logically fallacious. It's an argument often used by those who wish to undermine these norms and institutions. I don't automatically think that this is you, but it might be interesting to examine your line of reasoning and what makes you read things in my previous response that are not there.
  • jacquesm 10mo ago
    > When it really comes down to it, usa is a super power. For now. Once upon a time Russia was one too. These things are not set in stone and the way the United States is behaving it is not entirely out of the realm of the possible that they will stop being one. And that's assuming they will survive as a nation.
• unyttigfjelltol 10mo ago
  [flagged]
• drivingmenuts 10mo ago
  The only way we would ever answer to the ICC is if anyone could force us, by military threat. That's the only way people are put in front of that court.
• throwaway3060 10mo ago
  The US is not a signatory of the Rome statute. The ICC has no jurisdiction over the US, and any scenario where it claims it does would be an abuse of power.
  • FridayoLeary 10mo ago
    The same goes for israel, which provides some helpful context. "Us sanctions ICC for abusing their power"
    • deleted 10mo ago
      [deleted]
  • fusslo 10mo ago
    I'm not saying I agree with the following. From what I've read from the ICC: 1. Palestine acceded to the Rome Statute. 2. The ICC recognizes the Gaza Strip and the West Bank to be Palestinian territories 3. The ICC Article 12(2)(a): “The Court may exercise its jurisdiction if the crime in question is committed on the territory of a State Party to this Statute.” 4. Therefore, ICC argues it does have jurisdiction So, according to the ICC, you don't need to be apart of the Rome Statute for the ICC to have jurisdiction at least thats the argument for ICC's jurisdiction over Israeli nationals. IDK if the ICC ever tried that with the USA
    • throwaway3060 10mo ago
      IIRC, the prosecutor on the ICC responded to the sanctions by suggesting that they could charge individuals interfering with the court with obstruction. Which, as far as US sanctions are concerned, they definitely don't have the jurisdiction to do. I don't think anything legal came of it, but that is exactly the sort of threat that, from a prosecutor, sounds like abuse.
      • deleted 10mo ago
        [deleted]
      • 10mo ago
• JumpCrisscross 10mo ago
  > ICC member states should take steps to ensure the sanctioned judges and prosecutors do not suffer as a result of U.S. sanctions This would be lovely. It’s not going to happen, and it would be stupid for Europe to pursue alone. The ICC was born out of the optimism of the 1990s. When China was accepted into the WTO because trade was equated with democracy. When the world powers at least pretended to heed an international rules-based order. That order is dead. The EU is—nobly—trying to resurrect it. But the great powers, together with most regional powers, have explicitly rejected it in favor of spheres-of-influence realpolitik. Upholding the Rome Statute would mean picking simultaneous fights with America and Russia, and probably Israel, Iran, India and China, too. It’s simply not a tenable situation in a world where the rules are being re-written in multiple theatres.
• ThePowerOfFuet 10mo ago
  >Sadly, I fear that the U.S. may have need of defence from ICC rulings relatively soon. Nothing sad about a well-deserved reckoning.
• jasonm23 10mo ago
  United Gangsters of America it seems ... since the people have no say, just a moron with too much luck, too much power, not enough consequences. They'll come? and the fact that's a question shows American Justice has been absent for quite some time.