Which is why the ICC was established by several countries as part of an international agreement. It's literally other countries collaborating to punish bad actor countries.
What would you think of an agreement by ten guys that they'll work together to beat you up if they decide you're a "bad actor"? Is it somehow solemn and respectable merely because they came to an agreement? Even if you don't agree their self-declaration should give them power over you?
I think the way you've presented things is misleading. International relations is literally anarchy, and different groups have different points of view. Mere collaboration is only that.
FWIW, that's not how the ICC works, any more than your national legal system is "ten guys working together to beat you up if they don't like you."
The point was the ten guys are self-appointed and have no connection to any legitimate higher authority that you recognize. Which is a akin to the US' relation to the UCC, given it's not ratified the treaty.
My "national legal system" is a higher authority (than me), which I recognize as legitimate, and in any case have no power to resist.
I'm sure you can see the problem with your own argument.
Which is?
The US doesn't recognize the ICC as legitimate, and has the power to resist.
The ICC is 125 guys agreeing with each other that if one of them does bad things the others will hold them accountable.
It's not random people asking strangers to follow their rules.
It condemned Putin for crimes committed in Ukraine, which is a member.
It's literally the state of things: "there is no hierarchically superior, coercive power that can resolve disputes, enforce law, or order the system of international politics. In international relations, anarchy is widely accepted as the starting point for international relations theory." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy_(international_relatio...).
If you know of such an authority, please point it out. The UN is not it.
Anarchy doesn't mean constant conflict or power politics or anything like that.
That is indeed true that the Cold War politicking reduced the UN to its current role from what it was originally meant for. UNGC resolutions of course were meant to be more comprehensive and more binding, with the UNSC being used to enforce the resolutions. Which is of course why the Four Policemen + France insisted upon veto power as a prerequisite of them joining the club.
RE: there not being any coercive power that can enforce laws and such, that is of course true in the sense that there is no universal power for that. However, institutions with such power do exist, at least in a smaller scale.
Let's for example take the EU and its relation to Orbán's Hungary. The European Union was explicitly removing Hungary's access to EU funds as a coercive measure to punish Hungary for its democratic backsliding and as a way to enforce its membership terms, that Hungary had agreed to when ascending to the bloc. And that's why reforms (and promises of reforms) by the still fairly recent government of Magyar Péter are a prerequisite for Hungary to get access to the funds that got frozen.
Also, NATO exists, which can also be used as an avenue for resolving disputes between its member states. See also the 1974 Cyprus coup d'état, the subsequent Turkish invasion of Cyprus and the collapse of the Greek junta afterwards. The Organization of American States was used as a vehicle for resolving the Football War between Honduras and El Salvador with political and economic pressure, etc. And for a more historical example, both the Comecon and the Warsaw Pact had major Soviet coercion, although to be fair, other member states did also have some breathing room as long as they didn't step out of line too much.
---
Also, your own Wikipedia link also says that not all IR theory takes anarchy between states as a given, mainly in that the liberal doctrine doesn't assume such, unlike for example realism, which I alluded to.
USA sovereignty is not at issue, it's who now holds it as your democracy has failed, and will a future sovereign demos choose to apply this moral law to those within it's sovereign estate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Prot...
The USA isn't a party to the Rome Statute, and above and beyond that, reactively passed domestic legislation to thwart any attempt to prosecute crimes committed by its military, including in countries that are party to the Rome Statute -- more than 20 years ago. This is not a recent phenomenon.
You know what else is more than 20 years ago? Americans committing war crimes in other countries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisone...
Remember?
The USA, as a country, doesn't want to be held to account by other countries. As it outspends all the other militaries on the planet, it continues to get away with its crimes.
For example, if you were to accidentally sever a cable car cable through your negligence, killing 20 people... that's manslaughter, and you'd face a lengthy prison sentence.
Actual sentence when US military personnel do it: nothing. Whisked safely back to the US and ultimately just dismissed from service. No prison.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_Cavalese_cable_car_crash
US military personnel tortured Iraqis, physically abused them, raped them, sexually humiliated them, killed them and desecrated their bodies. Punishment: whisked to safety in the US, though at least some perpetrators saw US prison time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisone...
The US military illegally abducts people and breaks the laws and protections afforded to citizens in other countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition
...including completely innocent people who the US doesn't even want, they just fuck up and abduct the wrong person by mistake, and take years to accept they fucked up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_El-Masri
Let's not forget the US military child rapists in Okinawa (though at least in these cases, the Japanese actually got to enact justice on the guilty parties and they served prison sentences in Japan)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Okinawa_rape_incident
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/57562
> On September 4, 1995, three U.S. servicemen - who were stationed at Camp Hansen on Okinawa - rented a van and kidnapped a 12-year-old local girl. They drove her to a secluded beach, and raped her. The three servicemen were convicted for the crime in a Japanese court and served their sentences in Japan. This incident led to mass protests and increased debate over the continued presence of U.S. forces in Japan, especially on the island of Okinawa. While the three US servicemen were awaiting trial, they were held in pretrial confinement on the U.S. military base as part of the status of forces agreement (SOFA). The fact that they were not being held in the local jail particularly angered many Okinawan citizens who saw this treatment as unfair
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21583785
> Two US sailors have pleaded guilty to the rape of a Japanese woman in Okinawa [...] The incident, in October 2012, exacerbated resentment over the US military presence on the island.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpwwdyye4vgo
> A US soldier has been charged with the kidnapping and rape of a teenage girl in Okinawa, [...] The latest allegation also involves a minor, who is younger than 16, the age of consent in Japan.
And fuck it, even the wife of a spy who drives on the wrong side of the road and kills a man -- whisk her to safety, no punishment. If there were any justice in this world, she'd be in a UK prison for causing death by dangerous driving.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Harry_Dunn
The US military gets away with these crimes because other countries aren't strong enough to punish it and hold it to account. I hope, one day, they are.
when the ICC has never been able to do anything meaningful to any American administration.
Whenever the ICC has moved close to scrutinizing the U.S. or its close allies, Washington has retaliated with severe consequences.
This isn’t a new phenomenon limited to the Trump administration.