[tsimionescu]

I think you're right about the reason for the veto powers of the world's super powers at the UN Security Council. It's a pragmatic, though unjust, way of ensuring that they participate in the UN at all. Unfortunately, even so, they often ignore UN Security Council decisions even if they happen to pass - like the USA recently allowing the Israel-Gaza ceasefire resolution to pass, then immediately turning around and absurdly claiming that a UN security council resolution is non-binding. So even like, it's unclear how much the system actually works.

However, I don't agree that this means the ICJ or ICC should just not give decisions that they can't enforce. Ultimately these courts stand as unbiased observers on the world stage, and their opinions can be used by the countries making up the UN to guide their own actions. Ideally, the world's media should also pay close attention and guide its own reporting as well based on the decisions (and rationale for those decisions).

Much like the UN's climate panel, there is real value in having a panel of domain experts present an informed, unbiased, opinion on world matters, even if they can't directly enforce anything.

[ronjobber]

The reason ICJ and ICC should be careful about giving decisions they cannot enforce is because over time it can undermine their credibility. Eventually you end up with these international bodies writing the equivalence of "open letters", which is fine I guess... but if those actions have no effect on outcomes it really starts to undermine the Institutionalist side of IR theory.

Personally, I find that unfortunate. While I think the realists are mostly right, it is helpful to have international legal institutions that maintain some degree of legitimacy and power for the purpose of norm-setting.

[tsimionescu]

The problem is that they will also lose all legitimacy if they only give decisions against the enemies of the USA. They then end up looking as a propaganda arm of the USA, which is, in my opinion, even worse than being an ineffectual but respected international organization.

[immibis]

Speaking of climate, today Germany is claiming that climate protestors must be punished like the mafia: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/may/23/...

[tsimionescu]

Ah yes, the German Greens, truly the party of environmentalism... I would be almost shocked if I hadn't long become accustomed to my own country's extreme disconnect between the claimed doctrine of each party and their actual politics.