‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

ICC judge on what U.S. sanctions mean for her and global courts

229 points · 173 comments · rbanffy

  1. msdz · · focus · HN ↗
    Regardless of what one personally thinks about the ICC, this isn’t a good look for neither the US nor Europe.

    For the U.S., because sanctioning an “unpleasant”, but in essence harmless individual (geopolitically speaking) is ridiculous. Falling victim to de-banking alone can really ruin one’s life.

    And for the EU, because it once again showcases the dependence on U.S. systems for just about anything tech-related in everyday life and work.

    1. nostrademons · · focus · HN ↗
      It undermines the idea of the U.S. as a neutral arbiter for law, order, and free commerce. That may always have been a fiction, but it's a very useful fiction because it underpins U.S. soft power. It's much easier to get consent for being the world hegemon when you act like a benevolent, disinterested hegemon. Once you start becoming a participant - and overriding other institutions that are ostensibly providing neutral, impartial justice just because their decisions are inconvenient for you - you are essentially placing yourself below them and undermining your own legitimacy.

      Neutrality and objectivity may be a fiction, but it's one of the most useful fictions that have been invented in the last 500 years.

      1. appreciatorBus · · focus · HN ↗

        [dead]

        1. [deleted] · · focus · HN ↗

          [deleted]

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.