Marco Rubio ups US fight against ICC, warns military members subject to rogue tribunal
Washington, August 1
The US campaign to dismantle the International Criminal Court has gathered momentum as five nations move towards quitting the tribunal, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated on Friday.
Addressing a Cabinet gathering at the presidential retreat at Camp David in western Maryland, Rubio noted that dozens of countries have partnered with Washington since the initiative commenced two weeks prior.
"We've had dozens of countries already join us in this effort since we started two weeks ago," Rubio said.
Since mid-June, five nations, Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso, Venezuela, and Chad, have formally notified the ICC of their intent to quit.
A nation's complete withdrawal from the court takes a full year to take effect.
Warning against the tribunal's extensive jurisdiction, Rubio highlighted that American service personnel, alongside foreign political figures, remain exposed to severe risks, including potential indictments decades after serving in conflict zones.
"The International Criminal Court is an illegitimate international organization," Rubio said, adding, "They make themselves illegitimate because they claim that even if you're not a member of that court, they can come after you."
"The people who are in the biggest danger in our system are servicemen, people in uniform that they'll try to go out for the rest of their lives will not be able to travel anywhere in the world with their families, because they could be arrested on one of these," Rubio explained.
"Imagine you're a soldier, you fought in a war, and 20 years later, they try to come grab you."
Washington initially sought internal reforms within the ICC but escalated its strategy to dismantle the body after the court rejected those efforts.
Rubio also pointed to Justice Department Special Counsel Jack Smith, who previously indicted Donald Trump following his first presidential term, highlighting his background as an official with the court.
"If you want to know a little bit about it, Jack Smith used to work there. These are the people that think they can go out and basically indict any world leader and haul them into The Hague," Rubio said.
Commenting on the matter, Trump acknowledged the theoretical possibility of being targeted by the court while clarifying that there is no sign of active proceedings against him.
"There's no information that they're after me. It could happen. Just so you know, he's talking about it. That means he's not trying to defend me," Trump said.
Rubio further indicated that additional countries are anticipated to exit the tribunal in the coming period.
The Trump administration previously imposed sanctions targeting Karim Khan, the court's former chief prosecutor, who was recently removed from his post, as well as other tribunal officials.
Those actions followed warrants issued by the court against Israeli officials related to the conflict in Gaza and ongoing inquiries involving US personnel in Afghanistan.
— ANI
Reader Comments
Honestly, I see both sides here. The ICC does seem to have double standards - it goes after African leaders and smaller nations but barely touches the big powers. But Rubio's warning about soldiers being "grabbed" 20 years later sounds a bit fear-mongering. The real concern for developing countries like us is sovereignty - nobody wants a foreign court overriding our own justice system.
Typical American hypocrisy. They wanted to use the ICC against others when it suited them, and now that it might apply to their own military, suddenly it's "illegitimate." India has always said international justice should be based on consensus, not selective application. These countries quitting though - Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso - they've had their own issues with Western pressure.
I wonder what this means for global justice. As an Indian, I've seen how international courts often overlook crimes in the Global South while focusing on smaller nations. But this is different - the US is actively trying to destroy the institution rather than reform it. That sets a dangerous precedent. What happens to accountability for war crimes now? 😕
Sir, one simple question - if ICC is so useless, why did the US support it for so long? And why did they suddenly start their campaign only after the court looked into Israel's actions in Gaza? For us in Bharat, we've always believed in our own legal systems handling our own matters. But US sab kuch apne hisaab se karta hai - they pick and choose which international laws to follow.
As an American living in India, I find this move concerning
We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.