of the international criminal court receives a wave of support all states fit with us sanctions. president donald trump is punishing the cold for investigation and as well as conduct in gaza wills from actions to international justice. this is inside story, the

hello and welcome to the program. i'm not inside. the executive orders are still coming. second falls, the latest sanctions on the international criminal court. president donald trump says that the i c c abuses. it's paula taken, quote, illegitimate and baseless actions against the united states on its ally as well. he also says it's investigated as a threat to national security. so how does this affect the army corps with the ability to prosecute genocide and will crimes? and is the very concept of a rules based international order on the threats will try to answer these questions without panel a guess in a moment. but 1st, this report by michael apple is basically to drive the man with the stroke of his pin us president. donald trump has impose sanctions on the international criminal

quotes in the hey, his executive order references what he calls illegitimate and based this actions targeting america. and israel and then unprecedented move the i c. c issued interest bar and full prime minister benjamin netanyahu. and he's been defense minister in november last year. the prosecutor considered israel's actions in gaza with the military has killed more than 60000 palestinians, and displaced 2000000 car. him con, also issued warrants for how mazda is leadership, all of whom have since been killed, scandalous and corrupt organization. the i. c. c, the tracking is the right of all democracies to defend themselves, but it's not the 1st time comes, administration has targeted the un back court. it gives us no joy to punish them. he went off to the former chief, prosecute to 5 to ben su dot. when she investigated the actions of american forces

and i've gotten this done. but this time, washington's gone further, designating the icy sees work as a threat to national security and u. s. foreign policy. this executive order puts the united states on the side of war, criminals at the expense of victims of grave crimes, seeking justice, 125 of the worlds, 193 countries. a signature used to the rome statute, recognizing the jurisdiction of the i c. c. or at least they're obligated to in 2015 despite an i c. c, a risk for and for war crimes and off for solve effort of fail to arrest sedans, amaro bush. yeah. when he attended an african union summits in japan, hispanic similarly, mongolia rolled out the red carpet for rushes. presidents letting me have put in

the last year, this regarding an icpc, a risk warrant for crimes in ukraine. both south africa and mongolia, or among 79 nations who have pledged their unwavering support for the independence and integrity of the i. c. c. in the wake of transactions, it talks about not only sanctioning a actual staff, members of the i, c, c, a prosecutors of the i, c c. but also people who cooperate with the i c. c in the investigation and she was really official. so, you know, you're talking about human rights activists. victims face been widespread global condemnation of this perceived attack on the highest criminal court in the world. experts, one trumps america. first agenda could shift to universal principles of accountability and equality before the law, with severe consequences for human rights to come. mike level elgin's era for

inside story. it was the let's bring in all guests from new york with joined by william pace to form a convenience fee coalition for the international criminal court. in geneva is kenneth ross visiting professor at princeton school for public and international affairs and the former executive director of human rights watch. also in new york is david l. phillips and adjunct professor at georgetown university school of foreign service. i'm a full met, senior advisor to the us state department. welcome to or if you gentlemen, kind of, i want to start with you. why is trump doing this? america's not even a member of the i c c. so what is trump's motivation? in carrying out this executive order, or what trumps view of international injustice is that is for other people, not for americans or their allies and their been elements of disposition,

but the us government has maintained. going back to the origins of the dreadful criminal court at the original negotiations in rome, that was the main us position where they were happy with the court having trish fiction by a means that washington control. so, you know, they, they were okay with the veterans restriction over the citizens of governments that joined the court because the us government had no intention of joining. they were okay with jurisdiction confirmed confirmed by the un security council because washington could use and speak out. but what they didn't want was jurisdiction by virtue of where the crime took place on the territory given member state. and that's what's at issue in jobs because palestine has joined the court. the us doesn't like that because it could implicate in american theoretically, it could implicate these railways as it has. but this was a position that was rejected in rome. the us last about by account of a 120 to 7,

wasn't even clubs, and the by the administration, actually a band in that position when proven was charged because russia never joined the court. but cooper was charge of balls because his crimes were in ukraine, which had confer jurisdiction. so the us government changes positions that okay, we can live with this territory. i was restriction, but then trump lived, and she, you know, talked about the possibility of an american be prosecuted. but get to that. what do you really to was an old investigation in afghanistan, where the current prosecutor made clear that it doesn't duplicate americans? but the real issue here is that, you know, you know, there's always been an israel exception to us foreign policy. and trump was just on a bashed about this, you know, because not 10 yahoo and call on to our charge. she is declared war. i mean i see as well the mrs. kenneth right here. trump does have a precedence photography in the i see, see he did it in his 1st time. he's sanction thought to been through to who was then the i, c, c's, chief, prosecute to a full,

a alleged will crimes by us on forces. and i've got us on, but this time it does appear, he's gone even a step further. yes. so i think what we're seeing now is that extraordinary misuse of executive authority by the office of the president of the, you know, of the united states in the previous sanctions. it was focusing on the prosecutor and the judges. but this one now has gone way, way beyond that to the point that the banks are servicing the court. the interpreters of people working on victims issues of health people at the core of it in g o's, who are have been human rights activists and supporting the court for the last 30 years. the treaty and the establishment of the court. so the scale,

the, the bret's of this and, and even beyond, just as i say, see this executive decision is, is one that i think is hopefully going to be found a legal, unconstitutional. and i, i hope it will be able to be us warranted for the sake of the international community of, or a 125. the governments are in the court now $75.00 of them within 48 hours, came out with objections to this initiative. and i hope we can take this opportunity of in this, in this period, because the vast majority of citizens everywhere don't know about the i c, c. this is on the top priority for them. so i think this is going to be an important opportunity to educate people about the extraordinary achievement that was the international criminal court treaty in 1998. and it's rod application that

in 2010 and $2.00. and this was a, one of the very last of what was now, unfortunately, we realize that go on age and the post cold war period where we had tremendous strengthening of the international legal order. and of course, the wrong statute for the international criminal court is premier amongst those are treatments. when am i wanna come back to your point about the impact of the sanctions on, on the i c. c, the work it does. but david, 1st i want to ask you what message do trumps actions against the always the see here say about the us, his relationship with his role. is he sending a message essentially to the world you talk to as well, but us will come off to you as a viewer is real exceptionalism. the allocations that had been brought against israel at to do with using fluid as a weapon,

restricting paid to the palestinian people and targeting citizens. trump has a general to stay in for international justice is shown at the stand for justice here in the united states as well. given his recent actions. suntrust approach to the international criminal court in good in the israel context suggests his real view towards international justice and his approach that provides exceptionalism to his room based on the fear that the court might take action against the united states as well. for some procedure defense in the future to kenneth, from a legal point of view, how punitive are these sanctions? how are they going to impact the operational capacity of the icpc when it comes to prosecuting high profile will crimes,

particularly in context like syria and garza. well, there are 2 dimensions to the sanctions. one our travel restrictions, basically preventing people from visiting in the united states. and the court can live without that. but the author or her financial sanctions, and those are much more serious because it looks as if the us government is about to say that no bank can do business with the court or it's personnel. and that could freeze the court. now there is an answer, don't you to that's the hurricane union hasn't acted what's called the blocking statute. and it theoretically put, put in place on banking measures that would insure it or put it to give the court and it's personnel. it's gonna have to move quickly, but that i think it's the answer. everybody has seen this coming and hopefully they're bigger. they will be ready to move so that the court can continue to do what's important business with him. the other concern his that trouble this executive order talks not only about sanctioning the staff members of the i, c c,

but also people who work with the i c. c in, in the investigation. how significant is that? well, i mean, i think that's a huge, broad because it's not uh, limited to of to those who are most responsible for conducting the out the, the trial or an enforcement of the wrong statute. it is so broad that it concerns almost anyone who works at the court. a good concern of possibly international human rights organizations that work on victims issues that have a condemn, crimes against humanity, genocide and more crimes. for many years it is such a broad executive boarder that it could be very, very badly misused by the tropic ministration. and i hope that the senate

we're, we're very pleased that the senate refused to endorse the house bill, which was very similar to the president's executive order of. but we will hope that take the senate might come back and say that that and the executive order goes too far and we hope that the courts might do the same. so william can i also ask the impact of the sanctions on the stuff? how the moralizing is it? on the i c c stuff and how do you think it's going to impact the ability to do that jobs going forward? well, if you have a relatives in the united states and you cannot visit them if you have a financial connections with the bank, so it could be implicated the the, the, the fear now of the over rates of the uh,

compet ministration in their the way they have taken over the justice department are taking over the f, b i, et cetera. i mean, i would think that many people, oh, well, we very worried i had to thank you yesterday. uh, who should i do this type of an interview because of the danger of this new administration in the united states and then repressing of civil liberties? i appreciate on the stay on that david all the, any international legal metabolism. so b i c c can use to challenge or counteract these a us sanctions. and what is the likelihood of the i c c actually retaliation in this way for further 79 countries, but out of getting to the us sanctions on the i c. c. so that is 9 your international public opinion, but we've got, we've seen from trump in the past is he has disregard for public opinion, both on the us hand internationally. so it's very little that can be done against

a truck. ministration wants to impose gravel and economic sanctions at the international community needs to organize itself, needs to speak with one voice expressing concern about his miscarriage, of international justice. only that is their hope of correcting his problem and of getting the us back in line with the international system. but david, you took that about speaking with one voice. but we know that not all countries have publicly condemned this move by trump, australia, the tech republic hungry actually, uh, the old not been signatories on a joint statement issue to condemn trump's executive order. how significant is that very significant that these countries are refusing to align themselves with an international outreach over this decision?

it says something about us power and influence. the court isn't just the legal by, it's a political by and it wheels enormous influence with countries may add from a business or interest in the united states. all the countries you just mentioned, for example, if the us wants to wield its influence to suppressed international justice, countries are going to have to make a decision. on their own hand in hand. is this a system that's the situation that they can tolerate? and if not, what can be done about it? the timing subjects items around the world are gleeful because the us is broken. trustworthy, i see. say send a clear message that it won't abide by international norms when it comes to international justice. and this is a real risk for the i c, c and the whole international order and system that david's,

what are the political repercussions to the sanctions when it comes to relationships between the united states and its traditional allies in europe, who have expressed support for the allies, the se, in many countries in europe have expressed support in and out of the us as so far, been in different to their please. and it's difficult to see what those countries can do, given the power and influence of the us. but if countries come together and they share their concerns, it's not like one of us is going to listen. cycling talk to ministration will double down. but it's important that the international community express it's average so that it's on record of conjecturing these actions. and also in charge of international justice as a core principle of the international system. kenneth,

what do you make of victor old bands, comments that countries should question the implications of continuing to support a us sanctioned institution. or, i mean, that's classic big or bonded. if i could kind of come back to your earlier question, because you would ask sort of, what are the remedies here? and, you know, having different would be all the standard is not going to add to your and in the senate alone for the back anyhow. but we'd be the house with it and trump would have to sign. so i mean that there's just not going to be legislation here from, nor is there really, you know, an international legal solution with one exception. and that's what i want to focus off on. if you look at the wrong statute, there is a crime that is essentially obstruction of justice. you interfere with or try to intimidate or personnel because of their actions because of their official duties. you can be charged with interference with the administration of justice are commonly called the destruction of justice. this is

a crime under the wrong statute. now trump was vulnerable to charges last time when he impose sanctions on the former prosecutor budget and suda and her deputy issue in essence terms of the other she, she didn't pursue it but couldn't calm the current prosecutor's, a different kind of guy. and he wouldn't surprise me at all if his response to this way, even to effort to interfere with an in dependent international justice institution, would be to church from with this crime. now we can say, or what is trump care? you know, he's already been sure. i mean, criminal in new york, you know, but you know, he can't partner himself, there's no constitutional bar here. and, well, you know, i don't think he has to worry about being suddenly arrested. but what happened is that a good number of that was a 125 number states with the i c c. but basically tell from, don't show up, cuz we don't want to face this dilemma between arresting you versus winning up to our obligations to the court. and so suddenly a lot of the world would be out of balance. and you know,

he could turn key should turn to his 5 prove insights and apply them or how that suspend, you know, you didn't get to go to the brick summit because you were charged, you know what? it was not being able to travel around the world, trying to think about this and, and see whether really wants to sustain this blatant default and the court building . do you agree with what the tennis is saying, the can we expect more from the icpc prosecutor and i'm, i'm not sure i, i would welcome of a court proceeding with any efforts to so sick, legally interfere with their mandate as a treaty that's been signed by 125 countries. i didn't want to imply. i thought that the can't that, that they said it was going to pass a positive law. what i was talking about was making sure we have 5 or 6 of the republican senators that will not go along with this misuse of executive power by

the president. and i also really think that the efforts to try and continue to rally that you had 75 governments within 48 hours, assign a letters and, and communication against the trump executive order is extremely important. and i think of another aspect of this is the united states, not only was the primary reason, there was a number of tri rentals and like primary reason, there is a united nations. but the united us hosts the united nations of the prosecutor asked to be able to come to testify before the security council of once or twice a year. so there are a whole bunch of efforts by that trump administration to take fundamental us uh, commitments in the international law and diplomacy and rec,

this again. and i hope that we will have between civil society and governments. governments at all levels at the local state national level in the united states and at other levels are coming out to complain. again, this was one of the premier achievements of the post cold war period, which was probably the most a fundamental strengthening of the international legal order. since the immediate postwar structures in the 1945, the 1950 period. and we need to remind the world of the enormous advances that have been made. and we need to try to go back on this extreme isolationism in a 3rd period. there's a and, and get back to democratic rule of law constitutional democratic principles. kenneth, is that an even wider fallout? implication hit on global justice. does this executive order set

a dangerous precedent for all the countries to undermine international justice and the kind of sense? well, obviously, you know, somebody wants to flag international justice that site strong back into. they could have done that and his 1st term to and that did not destroy the international injustice i've been, you know, people recognize that trump is an utterly unprincipled man that he has. this is, there is no exception to us adherence, choose human rights policy. and you know, what we saw last time is that although government stepped into the breach, they always have this with the naturally human rights council of trump withdrew from and we saw with a lot from criminal court, which frankly, is stronger today that it was, you know, 4 years ago when, when trump was left in office, so, you know, well, yes, international justice takes a shift. i think most governments believe in the i t. c. they, you understand the importance of having an institution that upholds human rights. you know, even if national courts have been compromised and they're going to push through

trump's obstruction is i'm, you know, despite his wishes, but i don't think this effort is going to succeed. william, how do international legal institutions adapt and remain effective essentially, to the changing politically the politically charged global environment where in well again, i think i've tried to demonstrate that over whelming majority of the governments are supporting of the, the wrong statute in the international criminal court. the over whelming, majority of governments want to see the rule of law work. they do not want to have big powers, liked the united states, and rush up be able to just ignore international humanitarian law. it is a complete tragedy that this has, has, has developed in the last 1520 years. and i hope we can begin to,

to reverse that. and perhaps the kind of recklessness and morality of the trump administration and the even the, the, the, the other congressional efforts that hopefully that of irrationality will inspire the rest of the world. or many people, many of the governments and the rest of the world is to stand up and not associate, but the trump effort to undermine and the previous us government efforts to undermine course. incidentally, it should be, i think, pointed out that over the last 15 years, the united states mostly did participate within the, the court and the assembly of state parties. in fact, the united states delegation to the treaty body was always at least twice as large as any other delegation. and they were there as, as not as a state party, but as

a uh, a signatory of the wrong probes around the statute. and of course rush, you also signed the wrong statute back in 2000. so 2001. so it is very important. i think that we continue to do everything we can to expand the support around the world. and perhaps, as i said, the trump in ministration will actually bring a lot of countries in south east asia and africa, central america, of eastern europe, etc. closer to supporting the clock and instead of moving either way. thank you so much for all your thoughts to will i guess, went in pace. kenneth, well david l. phillips, we are out of time. thank you for all your analysis and thank you to for watching. you can see the program again any time by visiting a website. i'll just say we're adult calm as a further discussion guy to our facebook page. that's facebook dot com,

forward slash ha. inside story, you can also join the conversation on x on handle is at a j inside story. for me, my, the inside of the whole team here. the the latest news as it breaks. prison zalinski has guides these international carrying fee to step up on this deliveries to ukraine safety and defensive with detailed coverage people with must department of government efficiency showed up here at the us headquarters demanding access to the building from around the world for the people of what made any annual fee tests be attend? it's the end of a painful chapter of displacement. the. this is turkey. turkey a is the 1st country to develop a national,

sustainable tourism program in collaboration with the global, sustainable tourism cubs. village life here retains its job. every meal is like a feast from the farm to the table. hundreds of excavations and restoration works. this country is a place to slow down and enjoy the simple things come and discover the natural, historical and cultural beauties. there is no channel that covers world news like we do, we revisit places the state houses are really invested in that. and that's a privilege. as a journalist on counseling the cost, what's behind donald trump's terrorist? and could they trigger a global trade war? india is facing on its middle class to revive its slowing economy. but we'll look campbell pay off. plus, how's the china taken the lead in the global race, the terms of the cost on. i will just a rough and increasing power in africa,

russian most and that is killed, so did use violence in the country that these rushes presence in the central african republic. a stabilizing force, or calculated strategies to dillman is across the continent. they provide security and they take uranium, they provide security and we take time and rushes shadow and africa on which is 0. the, [000:00:00;00] the hello and several venue. it's good to have you with us. this is the news our life from don't coming up in the program today, the tears of joy across the guys in