Public Statements

U.S. Revokes Obligations to International Criminal Court

The Bush administration announced Monday its decision to distance itself from the International Criminal Court. The ICC will survive. But the US may have shot itself in the foot.

8 May, 2002 - The United States informed the United Nations on Monday that it wishes to revoke its signature on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Although the decision did not come as a surprise - both the former and current US administrations have consistently maintained that the United States would not ratify the treaty - it is an unfortunate one for international justice.

The ICC is the first permanent international court with a mandate to try those accused of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. The US decision will not prevent the court's entry into force on 1 July, 2002, which was guaranteed by the 60th crucial ratification last month. In the words of US Secretary of State Colin Powell, however, it means that the United States is "no longer bound in any way to its purpose and objective." More importantly, the decision sets a dangerous precedent that may undermine prospects for multilateral cooperation in the name of human rights and international justice.

The United States, of course, is no stranger to accusations of exceptionalism. It has spurned a variety of virtually universal multilateral agreements relating to everything from arms control to the environment (most recently, it backed out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and away from the Kyoto Protocol on climate control). But Monday's decision to "unsign" the Rome Statute risks setting a precedent for other governments to abandon their own multilateral commitments, or to make future commitments lightly. For an international community that still relies more heavily on shared norms of right conduct - and on multilateral enforcement regimes - than on supranational law, the risk is considerable.

For the US, the risk is also considerable. Whether or not the political strain between the United States and its allies who support the ICC will hinder ongoing efforts to expand a global coalition against terrorism, the decision will retard (if not undermine) a growing faith in multilateral solutions to the problems that affect us all.

As the world's sole remaining superpower, the US may now find itself in a position from which it can afford to opt out of widely accepted multilateral regimes. If history has taught us anything, however, it is that sustained, effective international leadership requires active participation in international regimes.