[infamouscow]

The United States does not recognize the legitimacy of the ICC, so I don't really see what the point of this is. It sounds good, but has no teeth. It's deranged to believe this will be the thing to stop Putin -- I'm sure he's cowering in his loafers.

The ICC should also not be confused with the ICJ. The ICJ, which the United States does recognize, has ruled heads of state are immune for all acts performed during their time in power, including torture, genocide, and crimes against humanity.

[dotnet00]

I think that like with the UN resolutions to condemn Russia, while everyone understands that the action has no teeth, it serves as a symbolic action to signal commitment. With this, I imagine the thinking is that countries which continue to recognize the legitimacy of the ICC will be implicitly signaling even stronger opposition to Putin's regime.

[fuzzylightbulb]

The US's opinions on the legitimacy of the ICC is not relevant to this at all. Russia's opinions on the legitimacy of the ICC is not relevant to this at all. It's not like Moscow is ever going to deliver Putin to any criminal court foreign or domestic.

No one concerns themself with whether Germany or Göring recognized the legitimacy of the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal. His neck was destined for a noose either way.

[eindiran]

Yes, but before Göring could appear before Nuremberg a war needed to be won. Nothing anyone claims about war crimes, etc has teeth until someone with a bigger stick beats them into submission.

[voxic11]

Isn't that how it usually works with courts issuing arrest warrants? I guess sometimes people turn themselves in voluntarily but usually someone has to actually go execute the warrant.

[infamouscow]

Hence why I don't see what the point is.

The idea that anyone is going to arrest Putin is preposterous.