US sanctions on ICC reveal power politics undermining global rule‑of‑law, demanding systemic reform and cross‑cultural legitimacy

Historical precedents show that international criminal tribunals repeatedly emerge when powerful states seek to manage crises without conceding authority, as seen with the post‑WWII Nuremberg Trials and the 1990s ICTY/ICTR, both created under great‑power auspices yet later criticised for selective justice. The Cold War era demonstrated how veto powers could block accountability, a dynamic echoed today by US sanctions aimed at insulating itself from ICC scrutiny. Recognising these patterns reveals that the current conflict is less about a rogue state and more about the structural tendency of hegemons to resist juridical constraints.