The creation of the International Criminal Court in the late 1990s represents a watershed moment in the development of international authority over war crimes and large-scale atrocities. The promulgation of the Rome Statue in 1998 and its entry into force in 2002 marked the first appearance of a permanent, international court with jurisdiction over international crimes in world history and is, as Schabas notes, perhaps the most innovative and exciting development in international law since the creation of the United Nations. Despite the enthusiasm with which the ICC was greeted by many states at its inception, the United States has taken a more ambivalent view. US attitudes toward the court have varied from reluctant and muted support during the Obama administration to full throated opposition and hostility under the Bush and Trump administrations. What explains US hostility towards the ICC? What are the arguments for and against US membership in the ICC? Which of these arguments do you find most convincing and why?
Your paper should be organized as follows. In the first section, after the introduction, discuss the purpose and structure of the ICC, including its jurisdiction and its authority, and the arguments for why such an institution is necessary. In the second section, discuss the reasons and arguments that US officials and others have offered for why the US should continue to remain outside of the ICC. In the third and final section, make an argument for whether or not the US should join the ICC. Be sure you address the counter-arguments to your own, and offer reasons and warrants for the various positions you take on this question.
DO NOT USE OUTSIDE SOURCES. ONLY USE THE SOURCES FROM THE FILES ATTACHED.
