Photo/Illutration The International Criminal Court based in the Netherlands (Asahi Shimbun file photo)

Eighty years ago following the end of World War II, the victors, mindful of the dreadful loss of life, sought to create a rule-based system rather than rely on the strength of nations to maintain international order.

But that principle has grown weaker and domination by force has again reared its ugly head.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Netherlands was established in 2002 to prosecute those responsible for the gravest crimes against humanity from an independent perspective rather than having victors in war make those judgments.

But the ICC now faces relentless pressure from both the United States and Russia, two permanent members of the U.N. Security Council.

SUPERPOWERS NOT FULFILLING THEIR ROLES

Last year, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a former defense minister, together with a former Hamas commander, citing war crimes committed in Gaza.

U.S. President Donald Trump retaliated in June by implementing economic sanctions that froze the assets of four ICC judges.

An emergency meeting of ICC judges was convened at which one of those targeted by the sanctions said tearfully: “I have undertaken my work to bring about justice for crime victims. But I have been placed on a sanctions list next to terrorists for an extremely irrational reason given unilaterally by the United States, which is not even a member. Is there anything that is more humiliating than this?”

Other ICC judges, including President Tomoko Akane, were reportedly moved by the appeal.

Akane has been placed on Russia’s most wanted list after the ICC issued an arrest warrant for President Vladimir Putin over reported mass abductions of Ukrainian children by Russian forces.

This is the situation that prevails 80 years after the end of World War II.

By invading Ukraine, Russia ignored the provisions of international law which state that a nation’s territory is inviolable.

For his part, Trump has called for annexing the territory of other nations, Canada, for example. The United States also turned a blind eye to the international order by bombing nuclear facilities in Iran.

China is also applying greater military and economic pressure on other nations.

The U.N. Charter calls on its members to maintain international peace and security by upholding international law.

Based on the lesson that the cooperation of major powers was needed to maintain order, five nations were named as permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and given veto power.

But the United States and Russia, which created the United Nations and the Security Council, have flouted international laws, threatened to use nuclear weapons and repeatedly vetoed resolutions not to their liking.

THE COURSE AHEAD FOR JAPAN

Japan has prospered due to the benefits arising from the rule of law.

With scarce food and other resources and limits to strengthening its defense because of a tight fiscal situation, Japan’s lifeline for prosperity and national security is free trade and international law.

If its key ally the United States acts in a way that undermines the existing international order, it could lead to a reassessment of Japan’s reliance on Washington, which could have been excessive in the past.

Japan took the initiative for the Trans-Pacific Partnership and must continue to shoulder the role of promoting free trade.

Given the current security environment, defense capability based on the alliance with the United States is necessary, but diplomacy plays a much greater role than military force.

There will be a need to deepen cooperation with nations that share the belief in the rule of law, such as South Korea, Australia and those in Europe, as well as occasionally take a stance critical of Washington.

In explaining how she, as a Japanese, became the ICC president, Akane said, “It reflects the fact Japan has maintained a pacifist stance throughout the postwar era as well as transmitted to the world the importance of rule of law.”

Eighty years after the end of World War II, Japan’s role as a protector of that rule of law is being called into question.

--The Asahi Shimbun, Aug. 15

Related News