The monumental challenge posed to the Geneva Conventions by the new U.S. Administration
OPINION. The new U.S. administration is targeting both the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the Geneva Conventions, as evidenced by the new Secretary of Defense’s stance on international humanitarian law. It is time to wake up, writes Alain Werner, director of the NGO Civitas Maxima.
As anticipated, a few days after Donald Trump took office, financial sanctions and an entry ban into the United States were imposed directly against the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), Karim Khan.
Following these sanctions, 79 signatory countries of the ICC Statute published a statement in support of international justice. In other words, over 35% of ICC member states chose not to sign this declaration, which explicitly criticizes the validity of a decree signed by the U.S. president. The list of these “abstentionist” states includes seven European states, six of which are from Eastern Europe, eight Latin American and Caribbean states, 16 African states, as well as Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand.
The ICC, increasingly delegitimized
Since the ICC has no police force of its own and is entirely dependent on the cooperation of its member states, it seems evident that this institution must fear not only a technical paralysis of its operations but also an increasing delegitimization of its role. The recent actions of Italy serve as a clear warning of the growing disregard by states for obligations binding them to the ICC, directly interfering the institution’s operations.
On January 19, 2025, Libyan national Osama Najim was arrested in a Turin hotel after attending a football match. This arrest followed an ICC-issued warrant implicating him in international crimes committed in Libya since 2015. Italy was unquestionably obliged to hand over the accused to the ICC, with no room for maneuver. And yet, Osama Najim was not transferred to the ICC but was instead released by an Italian judge and sent back to Libya on a government plane.
Criticism of Italy’s disregard
This failure to uphold its international obligations by the country that hosted the negotiations leading to the Rome Statute, which established the ICC, was widely condemned. The Italian Prime Minister is now reportedly under investigation by Italian judges regarding Najim’s expulsion. The press has drawn a connection between this deportation and Italy’s outsourcing of migration control to Libya, with various reports submitted to the ICC mentioning Italian politicians as potential co-perpetrators of crimes against migrants.
Nevertheless, if a European ICC member state refuses to fulfill its obligation to transfer a Libyan judicial police official to The Hague, it seems difficult to imagine that the same state would act differently if Benjamin Netanyahu or Vladimir Putin—who are also pursued by the ICC for international crimes—were to visit Rome.
The ICC prosecutor has simply done the job for which he was elected in 2021. Yet today, he is both the subject of an arrest warrant issued by Russia in 2023 and now facing sanctions directly decided by the U.S. president against him and his family, with additional sanctions potentially coming from Congress.
The Court, threatened as if it were a terrorist organization
The situation is critical, and it is up to the 125 states party to the Rome Statute to unite and stand together to defend the ICC. As the president of this institution, Japanese judge Tomoko Akane, stated in December 2024 at the opening of the Assembly of States Parties: “The Court is threatened with draconian economic sanctions by the institutions of another permanent member of the Security Council as if it were a terrorist organization […] We find it appalling that some states and individuals are outraged when independent judges issue rulings based on evidence and law […] We would rather expect all states, especially those party to the Rome Statute […], to be outraged that criminal acts, established according to the required legal standards, have been committed.”
But the assault does not seem to be limited to the ICC. It also concerns international law itself, including the Geneva Conventions.
The new Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, a Princeton University graduate, served as an officer in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo. Later, while working for Fox News during Donald Trump’s first term, he successfully campaigned on-air and privately for Trump to pardon several U.S. soldiers convicted by military courts for crimes against civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The writings of Pete Hegseth
In a book published in 2024, Pete Hegseth was explicit about how the U.S. military, which he now oversees, should operate: “Modern fighters face lawyers as much as enemies. Our adversaries should receive bullets, not lawyers. If we refuse to do what is necessary, that is precisely why wars become endless.” Regarding the Geneva Conventions, he wrote: “Should we follow the Geneva Conventions? What if we treated the enemy as they treat us? Wouldn’t that make them reconsider their barbarity? Hey, Al-Qaeda: if you surrender, we might spare your life. Otherwise, we will tear off your arms and feed them to pigs.” According to this vision, the U.S. military should fight on its own terms: “If our soldiers are forced to follow arbitrary rules and sacrifice even more lives so that international courts can sleep peacefully, isn’t it better to win our wars on our own terms? Who cares about the opinions of other countries?”
Pete Hegseth’s appointment will likely soon result in the closure of the Civilian Protection Center of Excellence, a Pentagon office established just a year and a half ago to protect civilians in war zones, marking the first time the U.S. military hired personnel without military experience, including individuals from civil society.
Against this backdrop, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)’s global initiative in favor of international humanitarian law—launched in September 2024 with six states and culminating in a “high-level meeting at the end of 2026 to preserve humanity in war”—seems more crucial than ever. However, few seem aware of this initiative, particularly in Washington. It is therefore urgent for the ICRC and other states—including Switzerland, the depository state of the Geneva Conventions—to engage in dialogue with American decision-makers to convince them that a world without battlefield rules—like all terrorist groups dream of—will never be in the United States’ interest. Moreover, American soldiers have historically benefited significantly from the protections afforded by the Geneva Conventions.
Break out of the shock and take action
The challenge posed to the established order by the new U.S. administration is colossal, including for all those—states, institutions, and individuals—who believe in the importance of justice and international law.
It is therefore high time to break out of stupefaction and inertia and to defend our convictions with at least as much energy, endurance, and enthusiasm as Donald Trump has successfully demonstrated since 2015 to promote his political agenda and win elections.
The article first appeared in French on Le Temps on the 16th of February 2025
Image: President Trump at a Cabinet meeting in the Cabinet Room of the White House. White House archives.
