DInald Trump’s vicious attack on the International Criminal Court is not surprising. His final administration slapped penalties on this in its investigations of potential war crimes in Afghanistan, including the US, and the actions of the Israeli forces. But his new executive order is still up, attacking the courts of the court and endannering its functioning.
The US has never joined the ICC, afraid of investigating its own actions and its allies. Joe Biden broke both the Court and US claims a commitment to the “Rules-Based International Order” when he justified the arrest of the warrant for Vladimir Putin while attacked as “anger” issued for the Benjamin Netanyahu.
But for Mr Trump it’s not just about being an expedition. His love for the court talks to something primary about this president. Ultimately, the law he believes in is the forest. Naked transactionalism and coercion replace diplomacy and alliance. The largest animals are hungry and the rest should be plattered or fleeing.
This credit can be seen at work again in the destruction of USAID. The unstoppable disappointment for life gets sick. As Gordon Brown puts up aloud to the Guardian, this decision will be killed. It is also shortsighted and stupid. USAID has become a clever, inexpensive foreign policy tool. It costs less than 1% of the federal budget in 2023 years of fiscal – and most of the money returns to the United States. Spending foreign help in the US as a percentage of gross national income is less than most advanced economies. USAID helped to strengthen countries, contain diseases, and develop good mood in areas to be viewed today with other patrons.
The doctrine “Mr Trump” Mr Trump is clearly visible in his reckless and immoral ethnic call to clean Gaza, so that the US is “owned” by a new “Riviera of the Middle East”. This is the most disturbing element of its unexpected and repeated proposals for expanding American territory, at the place of the expected separation. He even expressed his willingness to use military force in other places.
There is no expectation that US troops will march to Canada. His proposal to Gaza was not realized. At least some of his suggestions will surely use as the Crudest available threat to achieve concessions on other issues. But one concerned with the same theme suggests that observers may need him to take literally as well as seriously, however the sound of these ideas sounds. He does not have to implement them exactly for them to prove to be strictly damaging. And whether or not it expanded its boundaries, it seemed that every hope that Mr. Trump would approve the land of Israel and Russia, which strengthened others to use the strength to re -create boundaries.
In the past, some wondered how effective the ICC was: the work of bringing criminal wars to justice has been slow, painful and often unsuccessful in the best of time. Mr. Trump’s attack is a twisted recognition of the importance of the court, and the international law more general. It is alarming that influential voices within the British government appear to be inclined to the strict law of international law as an obstacle to home priorities, rather than celebrating its place in the architecture of a civilized world. Recailing with Mr. Trump’s excess is not enough. The UK and others deserve their “unchanged” support for the ICC. They must defend it, and the values it stands for, in any way they can.
Do you have an opinion on the issues that have been raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response up to 300 words by email to consider for publication in our letter section, please click here.
