a josh and most and that is scalable. so did use violence in the country that he's russia's presence in the central african republic, a stabilizing force, or calculated strategies to dillman across the continent. they provide security and they take uranium, they provide security and we take time and rushes shadow and africa on out to 0. the international criminal court receives a wave of support all states hit with us sanctions. president donald trump is punishing the cold for investigations as well as the conduct in gaza. wills from actions 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 taking quotes illegitimate and baseless actions against the united states on its ally as well. he also says it's investigates as a threat to national security. so how does this affect the army course 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 of guests in a moment. but 1st, this report by michael apple. physically to drive with the stroke of his pin us president donald trump has imposed 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 much does leadership all of whom have since been killed, scandalous and corrupt. organization of 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 investigates the actions of american forces and i've gotten this done. but this time, washington has 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 in full crimes and off for solve africa failed to arrest sedans, amaro bush. yeah. when he attended an african union summits in johanna spec. similarly, mongolia rolled out the red carpet for rushes. president vladimir, 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 pledge 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, prosecutors of the i, c c. but also people who cooperate with the i, c. c in the investigation into is really official. so, you know, you're talking about the 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 shed to universal principles of accountability and equality before the law, with severe consequences for human rights to come. michael level l, g 0 for inside story. well, the, let's bring in all guests from new york with joined by william pace to form

a convenience fee coalition to the international criminal court. in geneva is kind of ross visiting professor at princeton school for public and international affairs . i am the former executive director of human rights watch also in new york is david l. phillips and i jumped 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 kenneth, 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? well trumps view of international justice 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 could control. so, you know, they, they were okay with the veterans restriction over the citizens of governments to join the court. because the us government have 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 involved because palestine has joined the court of the us doesn't like that because it could implicate in american theoretically they could implicate these rightly he's, 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 binding administration actually a band in that position when proven was charged because russian never joined the

court. but cooper was charge of balls because his crimes renew crane, 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 give it that. what do you really, to was an old investigation in afghanistan, where the current prosecutor made clear that it doesn't implicate 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 because not 10 yahoo and call on to our charge. she is declared war. i mean, i see, see, or will you miss tennis right here? trump does have a precedence as a target saying the i c c. he did it in his 1st time. he's sanction 5 to been sued to who was then the i. c, c's chief, prosecute to a full, a alleged will crimes by us on 4th, then i've got a song, but this time it does appear. he's gone even a step further. yes. so i think what we're seeing now is an 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. for 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 look at the car all over 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 breath 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 supported 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. one of them i want to 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 i c c here? say about the us is relationship with as well. is he sending a message essentially to the world you talk to you as well, but us will come off to you as a viewer, as real exceptionalism. the allegations that have been brought against israel, that to do with using fluid as a weapon, restricting paid to the palestinian people and targeting civilians. i trump has

a general to stay in for international justice is shown at this stand for justice here in the united states as well, given has reset actions. suntrust approach to the international criminal court in good in the israel context suggest is real view towards international justice. and his approach that provides exceptionalism to his real, based on the fear that the court might take action against the united states as well. or some procedure defense in the future to kenneth, from a legal point of view, how punitive all 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 where there are 2 dimensions to the sanctions. what are travel restrictions?

basically preventing people from visiting the united states and the court can live without that. but the author, her financial functions, and those are much more serious because it looks as if the us government is going 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 the speaker opinion 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 is going to have to move quickly. but that i think it's the answer. everybody has seen this coming and hopefully they're because 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 and in the investigation. how significant is

that? well, i mean, i think this is a huge problem because it's not uh, limited to of 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 condemned 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 trip the tropic ministration. and i hope that the senate, 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 the executive order goes too far, and we hope that the courts might do the same. so william can i also ask at the impact of the sanctions on the stuff, how demoralizing 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 banks, it could be implicated of the, the, the fear now of the over rates of the uh, compet ministration in their 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,

believe very worried. i had to think 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 your honesty on that david's all the, any international legal metabolism. so b i c c can use to challenge will counteract these us sanctions. and what is the likelihood of the i c c actually retaliation in this way with the 79 countries, but i don't get it to the us sanctions on the i c c. so that is 9 your international public opinion, but we've, but we've seen from trump in the past is he has disregard for public opinion. both of us have internationally. so it's very little that can be done against the trump . the ministration wants to impose gravel and economic sanctions. the international

community needs to organize itself, needs to speak with one voice expressing concern about his miscarriage, of international justice. only that is there hope of correcting his problem and getting the us back in line with the international system. but david, you talk that about speaking with one voice. but we know that no old countries have publicly condemned this move by trump, australia, the czech republic, hungry actually, uh, the old not been signatories on a joint statement issue to condemn trumps 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 and no one has influence with countries,

many of whom i business or interest in the united states. all the countries you just mentioned. for example. if the us wants to wield its influence to suppress international justice, countries are going to have to make a decision on their own. and in tandem is this a system situation that they can tolerate? and if not, what can be done about it? the timing subject lines 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 i. c. c. in many countries in europe express support and out of the us as so far been indifferent to their place. 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 unlike with 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 condemning these actions. and also in trying international justice as a core principle of the international system to tell us 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, could i come back to your earlier question because where you would ask sort of, what are the remedies here? and you know, i've been, i different with be all the standard is not going to add to your and in the senate alone for the back end, you have would 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 for personnel because of their actions because of their official duties . you can be charged with interference with the administration of justice service, but the kind of i 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 palm shoot, you an essence term and the other cheek, she didn't pursue it. but chron. com, the current prosecutor's, a different kind of guy. and he wouldn't surprise me at all if his response to this way he meant to effort to interfere with an independent 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, i'm back, you know, he kept talking himself, there's no constitutional bar here. and, well, you know, i don't think you guys 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, because we don't want to face this dilemma between arresting you versus wedding 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, you should turn to his fine poop insights, get a platinum or how it 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 to think about this and, and see whether it really wants to sustain this blatant default and the court building. do you agree with what tennis is saying that can we expect more from the i c. c prosecutor, and i'm, i'm not sure i, i would welcome of a court proceeding with any efforts to uh, 6 uh, illegally 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 the senate 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 $75.00 governments within 48 hours assign a lot of letters and communication against the trump executive border 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. the prosecutor has to be able to come to testify before the security council once or twice a year. so there are a whole bunch of efforts by the trump administration to take fundamental us of commitments in 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 that other levels are coming out to complain. again, this was one of the premier attainments of the post cold war period, which was probably the most the fundamental strengthening of the international legal order. since the immediate post war 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 and go back on this extreme isolationism and authoritarianism 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 metabolisms? well, obviously, you know,

somebody wants to flag international justice that site to trump banking, or they could have done that. and his 1st term to and that did not destroy 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 auburn government stepped into the breach. it always office 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 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 instruction, as 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 we're in well, again, i think i've tried to demonstrate that over whelming majority of the governments are supporting of the treat wrong statute in the international criminal court. the overwhelming majority of governments want to see ruled wall work. they do not want to have been power is like 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 immorality of the trump administration and the even the, the, the,

the other congressional efforts that hopefully that of rationality 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 group, the wrong 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, in africa, central america, of eastern europe, et cetera, closer to supporting the clock instead of moving the other 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 our website. i'll just say we're adult calm. i'm for further discussion, go 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 insight and the whole team here,

the a septic. and it's designed to inflame and defensive the way that the story is being told. it's not right. and it's not accurate from social networks to legacy media. the listening post explosives, the post is behind the headlights pulled out. there is no channel that covers world news like we do, we revisit places the state houses are really invest in that. and that's a privilege, as a journalist, it's one of the most recognized sites around the world. things for support from phone and wide, put for the funds back home. it's more than just a football club. anyone who says policy should be left off to football and you know, doesn't know about football, isn't about politics. and this is the stuff on the passion and the politics of

liverpool, etc. the defiance joins part of the funds, who make football series on houses in southern city, be spending most cell sticks used to play and indigenous my purchase for a can to hockey, but like 90 percent of my purchase, he doesn't speak the native language, my platoon. good religion and education of the outside years took over speaking our own language was preventing and punished of the 556 native languages that existed in latin america and the caribbean. nearly 40 percent are in danger of perishing but some are fighting to reverse that trend. fee of buying a gail uses to to talk to teach young people who don't go and she has more than 200000 followers. my follow as identify with me they want to learn, but they don't know who to talk to. they have no one to teach them the language all the way and culture. now with strengthening face, well,

english is rapidly becoming the world common language. the original languages of the americas are dying at an accelerated pace. the of israel's armies withdrawing from the nets or him cargo, which divides gauze as north and south. it's part of the ceasefire agreement. the little ones are enjoying this is not, is there a life and don't? those are coming up. in the last 5 time, national was held captive and gaza for 15 months of a live in times capital bank called a cool for direct tools to resolve a fighting and democratic republic of congo and between the army under london $1.23 rebels. the indian permanence and remove these body

types but power and local elections in the capital, new delhi on the 27th.