Yep, focused on that one single country breaking IHL and the like... Cause you're not supposed to look at other actors violating many, if not all, of those rules with impunity. Russia is breaking the rules and getting punished for it; we're breaking the rules and getting away with it. Who do you think is making a better case for a "might makes right" world?
I feel I am well informed and have thought about the ramifications of all that I know is in play, then I hear another Anders podcast and realize there are more layers to that onion. Thanks Anders, I appreciate your insight 👍 From a former US naval aviator, now a Texas resident watching closely from afar.
I enjoy Anders' analyses on Danish TV - we have 2 channels, none of them are biased I am glad that his points are accepted and appreciated by those of you who are in the loop Now, what's the heck is going on with you?? 😕🤔
The ICC would carry more weight if it also had the ability to enforce against western nations like the US, and potentially Israel as well, given the US's response to the warrants the ICC issued against Israel. This is the fundamental problem...Russia isn't wrong that not all nations are treated equal by the ICC.
Yes, any credibility the ICC imagines it obtains by doing the right thing regarding Russian oligarchs won't balance out their debasement in issuing warrants for Israeli leadership.
Yup. The ICC vs the great powers is overall interesting (and none of the great powers come out in a positive light). The idea of sovereignty that Russia has (that international law is for lesser nations) is one that it shares with the US, China and India. The only "great power" that supports the ICC is the EU, but the EU isn't really a great power yet (it has the economic clout, but not the unity or the cohesive military clout).
@@hanrockabrand95The only bias is that the ICC has historically only gone against africa and south america- but it's only after it has threatened to prosecute the many crimes of Israel that it's suddenly "biased". Curious!
Another aspect is the timing of the ICC. They just issued arrest warrents for Israeli ministers for specifically war crimes. ICC needed to show that they also persecute russians in a similar fashion. Your point on super powers wanting to do what they want is still standing though.
The problem with Russia's vision of the great powers making the rules and forcing other nations to bend to their will is that Russia has demonstrated that it isn't really a great power anymore.
Even if they were, "might makes right" is the wrong lesson to learn from the rise of international law and rule-making after the European wars in the 20th century.
Because 'bad actors' who do not recognise liberal democratic principles can use the ICC as a weapon against those who do accept, follow, try to implement, and enforce, those principles. However, nothing involving people is perfect, so if you want to pick holes in Western principles then there is plenty of opportunities to do so. In my opinion it's a question of balance, intent, commitment, and transparancy, I would support Western attitudes and ideologies any day compared with the sort of medieval ideolgy of despotic and kleptocratic kingship, barrons, and princes, of the current Russian regime, who enslave their populations for the comfort and enrichment of themselves, and their dynasties, without laws or restraints on their power.
Because the supreme law of the US is the US Constitution and no external treaty or convention can supersede it. It's simple if you understand what sovereignty means.
@@yurinator4411 Supreme law is international law.If you do crimes on foreign soil,then you will get prosecuted by that country as well as the ICC and ICJ.
Stealing children is a particularly heinous crime. Even when you look at dictarships like the Junta in Argentina, which engaged in all manner of kidnapping and torture; these people managed to get themselves blanket immunity deals when they stepped down. Although immunity deals were eventually invalidated decades letter, some of the earlier prosecutions and outrage happened because of the stealing of children from victims of disappearances. The military did not have immunity for this specific crime because they either a) forgot to put into the immunity law but more likely, they b) just hoped nobody would notice. Putting child stealing on the immunity law would have raised some red flags. People might have asked how anyone could justify child snatching as a national security matter. I'm not surprised that the first Russian crime against humanity highlighted by the international community was the child snatching, even though Moscow seems intent on violating every section of the Geneva Convention.
Should we not also remove Russia from the UN Security Council as some claim Russia did not ratify after the old Soviet regime feel in 1991 this making present sitting in UN Security Council illitimate also did they pay the membership fee for the the later years? As growing up after the war I still does not understand how the west have not been able to control or stop the invasion and barbarism of Russia I think it was one of the mandates of our modern and democratic world’s order 😰😰🤬Slava 🇺🇦🇩🇰🇨🇦👨🏼🦳
@@perchristophersen8966 "I still does not understand how the west have not been able to control or stop the invasion and barbarism of Russia" have you ever heard of "Nukes"" or are you living in lala land?
The manner in which Ukrainian children have been kidnapped reminds me of the Nazis when they first invaded Poland. In accordance with their instructions, they stole many children of so-called "Aryan appearance", with incalculable psychological effect on the victims.
Russia doesn’t think great powers should be able to do what they want. They think Russia should be able to do whatever they want and don’t care beyond that
"The Rules Based Order" is a term used by the United States to avoid talking about International Law and the I.C.C. because they do not adhere to International Law nor recognize that institution. Your point stil stands regarding the Russian Federation, but "The Rules Based Order" is a misleading term which in reality means: Order Based on the Rules set by the United States.
While I always find your videos informative I thing this specific topic hits a VERY soft point on the west and especially the US in how Russian propaganda has been as succesfull as its has been. The war in Iraq was such a big blow to the understanding of international law that it has been very easy for countries like Russia and China to play the game of "whataboutism".
A bit odd, but also understandable, that Ru frames the ICC as "created by the west and the USA" when the USA voted against it after the negotiations about it.
@@aleksanderfradkin7955 I would be a millionaire in russia just by selling my old used car and then moving there. Actually I'm planning on bying rubbles. To save money. I'm low on toilet paper and rubbles are slightly cheaper.
This is a great video. At first, I didn't really care about the Russian state's view of the ICC and wasn't planning on viewing the video. However, it's a very pertinent and interesting analysis and I'm very happy to have seen it. Great job!! 👍👍
Hahahahahahaha❤😂 If both of you have anything-human-with in you, you should travel to Crimea and Donbas and talk to locals... Before continuing to indoctrinatine the-sheep with-lie-based-hate-narative. Y-like this-deviation of reality simply because it makes Russians look bad. Have y-ever heard of coup in Ukraine, 16.000 Russian civillian casualties since 2014 coup, of wich 1500 were kids. Have y-ever heard of over one-MILLION Russians-expelled-from Ukraine since-unelected-nazis were installed by yr-wrstern"democracies"?
Just having fun, and watcing Puck deleting my comments systematicaly.. Hahahah❤😂 If both of you have anything-human-with in you, you should travel to Crimea and Donbas and talk to locals... Before continuing to indoctrinatine the-sheep with-lie-based-hate-narative. Y-like this-deviation of reality simply because it makes Russians look bad. Have y-ever heard of coup in Ukraine, 16.000 Russian civillian casualties since 2014 coup, of wich 1500 were kids. Have y-ever heard of over one-MILLION Russians-expelled-from Ukraine since-unelected-nazis were installed by yr-wrstern"democracies"???
You can't be a sovereign country if your internal laws are superseded or contradicted by laws from outside the country. This is obvious. The US has also withdrawn from the ICC for precisely that reason. China and India never signed it either. The largest/most powerful countries in the world are not members. It's important to provide some context to the (ir)relevance of the ICC and of the UN, for that matter.
@@nic.h The UN needs to be disbanded. Its predecessor, The League Of Nations, was a monumental failure also. One world governments and national sovereignty are mutually exclusive concepts.
If it means they can 'buy' something militarily valuable from the Chinese, Pute will hand over named territory voluntarily. The Chinese are already grabbing resources in Eastern Russia. And the people there know it and are left poorer. So poor that they sign contracts and go to Ukraine 10,000 km away
Russia is a vassal state of China. Russia has already ceded a river island on the border and are now about to cede land along the Tumen River. "Why then has he floated the idea? That stretch of coastal access was ceded to Russia by the Ching dynasty in the 19th century and the PRC has wanted it back for decades."
Hi Anders. Good videos overall. I think it would be nice if you would add a picture of the mentioned person on the screen the first time you mention him in the video.
Analysis of such quality and critical insight is what i would love to see established as standard for public broadcast journalism. You're doing a great job, thank you.
I completely agree with your analysis. This fits their usage of lies, too. They use obvious lies as a demonstration of power. The "I know that you know that I know, that I'm lying, but you can't do anything against it."
Russia is NOT a member of the International Criminal Court and is not subject to any of their rulings. You have the brass neck to talk of Russian "crimes", when the International Court of Justice (to which all UN members are subject) has ruled that it is plausible that Israel is committing outright genocide in Gaza, and your own country, Anders Puck Nielsen, backs the genocide up to the hilt. Look at the two conflicts: the Ukraine where UN figures show civilian deaths are less than 2% of the total, or Gaza, where virtually all of the deaths are civilians. Which country is committing war crimes here? And yet Denmark, where Nielsen lives, backs genocide in Gaza, but claims to think there are war crimes in the Ukraine. Newsflash for those still awake: the UN has stated that the majority of "war crimes" at the front in the Ukraine are being conducted by the Ukrainian side, including summary execution of Russian prisoners. But you won't hear that on Nielsen's channel. Does this guy receive a cheque from the CIA?
Unfortunately America reacted equally in 2002 regarding warcrimes committed in Irak by Americans. They are also not member of the ICC. They made the "the Hague Invasion Act", en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act This is, and still is violence (America) versus denial (Russia). America should just recognize the ICC and be a member.
This is what I came here to say. I agree with Ukrainians defending themselves and agree with other nations giving support. I just think these arguments need to at least be included in the discussion. I really wonder if Russia would have invaded all these countries if the US hadn’t invaded Iraq under false pretenses.
@@julianvandercook Russia should have taken issue and gained support against the US actions using the UN for its intended purposes. Instead they are using it as an invalid argument to "justify" their own criminal actions. Two wrongs don't make a right.
@@nic.hROTFLMAO. Do you even remember what the world was like in 2000s? Colin Powell's performance was at the UN. Everyone was worried about an Islamic resurgeance. 'Cept Ukraine, which was busy filching natural gas from Russian pipelines meant for paying European customers.
@@nic.h Do you call Articles 51, 106 and 107 of the UN Charter "criminal acts"? These are exactly the UN Articles that Russia is currently IMPLEMENTING
Thanks for analysis, Anders. Sad news: Pete the medic, a South African helper in Ukraine just passed. He sustained fatal shrapnel wound while evacuating injured Ukrainian soldiers to safety. Totsiens boetie, en baie dankie vir alles...😞
If only the great powers have real sovereignty then why would the smaller countries support Russia's idea? The world majority is made up of small countries or countries that have never been great powers and never will. Aside from possibly the US, Russia and China every other country would be ceding their sovereignty in this world view. That's more than 6 billion people and 200 countries. Russia's position makes no sense.
To be fair, much as I am anti-Putin and pro-West, the US absolutely thinks it can act outside and above international law, as my home country (the UK) sometimes wishes it could. Russia maybe be more egregious and have less plausible justifications, but is not unique in this.
@@Jaxck77 I would submit the USA did not ratify the treaty for essentially the same reason as Russia. Americans only like rules or laws that work in their favour.
4:04 it would be so much more convincing if *both the US and Ukraine* would actually sign and ratify the documents around the ICC. we can talk all day about the _rules-based world order_ but if important actors like the US or the country which wants support from all of us in their war against evil Russia don't bother to commit themselves to this rules-based world order, then what does it tell us about their true standing about these matters? do they really support the system❓
You always have great content Commander Nielsen. I sometimes take some issues with your interpretations or want to suggest some caveats or details you didn't get quite right. But in this case, I think your message is 100% accurate, valid and precise. It is important too, because the Russo-Ukrainian war isn't just a war. As you say: it is an ideological struggle, a continuation of the Cold War in many ways. This is why it is VITAL that Ukraine achieves as total of a victory as is humanly possible and that simple "defeat" of the Putin regime is unlikely to be adequate. The Russian Federation needs to be defeated to such an extent that it undergoes, whether as a result of internal or external pressure, major reforms which insure that another regime like the Putin regime never again emerges in the Russian Federation of any of its constituent states.
The UN Charter, in Articles 106 and 107, gives the right to the winners of the Second World War - the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and China - to apply all measures against the countries that fought against them to prevent actions aimed at revising the results of the Second World War. In particular, it is possible to use military force against these countries. To do this, it is enough to notify the other three winning countries, but not to get their consent. Forceful coercion of countries that want to revise the Yalta-Potsdam system in Europe can also be carried out by Russia, which is the legal successor of the USSR. Russia can stop attempts to revive Nazism in Germany, Hungary, Romania, Austria, Bulgaria, Finland, Croatia, Slovenia, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Italy, Spain, Norway, Denmark, Holland, Japan. Articles 106 and 107 of the UN Charter also apply to all those countries that refuse to inherit from the USSR - Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania. Their attitude that there was a Soviet occupation and the treaties of Friendship and cooperation concluded by them with the Third Reich move these countries into the ranks of the Hitlerite coalition. The same position is taken by modern Ukraine, which accepts as its predecessor the military-political formations of the OUN-UPA, created by Ukrainian fascists. Proves that all these post-Soviet republics belong to the Hitlerite coalition. Hence the possibility of revising the territorial acquisitions of countries that position themselves as supporters of the Hitlerite coalition. Plus SPONSORS OF the Nazi regimes (USA and Britain)
@@evgeniya7853 International law says any country can take territory from Russia and Russia can in turn go f*ck herself. Don't believe me? Watch this.
Russia's population is shrinking and that isn't changing soon. Russia's days as a dominating great power are numbered just from that. They'd be better off being good neighbors and team players, but no, they want to be the empire they used to be
Paper is patient - a dutch saying. Ironicly, it gains international allure by the use by Anne Frank, a Jewish girl and war victim. In this case, it means justice is a time game. We have to wait.
the wheels of justice grind slow but surely ....is the english equivalent ...criminals always think that they can escape but the legal system never sleeps , it just changes shift and once your name is on the list , they will find you
Hej Anders, tak for dine informative UA-cam's. Jeg har været inde ICC's hjemmeside, hvor jeg har bemærket at mange store lande ikke har tilsluttet sig aftalen - heriblandt USA, ved du hvorfor at de netop ikke er med?
Serbia claimed that they don't recognized international court....Then they handed over Milosevic, Karadjic, Mladic etc as they become more of a liability then an asset and heroes.
Note that the US and Russia both agree on the role of the ICC in enforcing international laws against great powers. The difference of opinion is on whether russia is a great power.
I think the most absurd idea in the whole thing is that Russa consider itself as a great power. It's not. By Russia logic, Moscow should submit to Washington and Beijing.
Very interesting! As has been pointed out already, Russia is not the only country that doesn't recognize the ICC. The USA even has an 'The Hague Invasion Act' that could theoretically turn this (otherwise rather boring) city into a war zone. They also seem to think that international law is something for small countries...
Unfortunately it has already undermined the court's authority that the US has never been held accountable for obvious crimes.. Rules need to apply to everyone 🤔😟
Maybe in the imperialistic meaning of "civilization": the greater the power and the ruled territory, the greater the civilization. So it's in the power sense, not in the moral sense.
@@Princip666 I mean, it's a country that collectively worships Hitler whilst 20% of their population shits in holes due to a lack of sanitary infrastructure.
The rules based World order 'disadvantages' those powers who want to expand by brute force rather than through others complicity. Rightly or wrongly, the greatest power is exerted by big individual or groups of nation states, threatening and using overwhelming military force. This outmatches the power of any 'international court'.
Putin to General: Did you take Kyiv in three days? General: No. Putin: Did you take Kherson, Odessa, Kharkiv? General: No. Putin: Well then, what did you take in Ukraine?! General: _Three washing machines, two toilets, and a fur coat!_ 😂
Zelensky is on a visit to the doctor for examination for illnes. So he ask the doctor: "doc, do i have vovchansk ? No, says doc, you do not have vovchansk...Well doc, do i have kharkiv ? Doc answers: you do have kharkiv, but it will go away soon....🤣😅😂
I think you are probably right, that Russia sees itself above the rule of law. If that is because they are a "great power".. That leads to 2 options. Either 1) Russia comes to it's senses and understands that the rules apply to everyone or 2) Russia will need to cease being a great power so they will have to submit to the rules based order. I think they think option 1 is impossible because they don't even have a rules based order in their own country. Therefore option 2 is the only one that is possible, indeed probable.
3)Russia only do what USA all ready done many times in Iraq and Afghanistan and Yugoslavia and LIbya, committing war crimes knowing that ICC dont have any jurisdiction to arrest any USA official .
Interestng. I can see the Russian argument. Its not like the USA or China gives any real credence to any international supernational institution if it goes against their interests. In a way it is a true observation of the world that '"great powers" play by their own ruels'.
I followed this channel to get an unbiased coverage, but I guess I gotta keep searching. Not once it was mentioned, that in the international order USA is always above the law. It's a simple truth, why not include that? I'm not defending anything here, it's just twists the perspective to ignore that.
You should have tied this to Netanyahu and Galant and US. US because they actually have a law which says that US can invade the Hague if it is accused of war crimes.
He could have tied it to Kim Jong Un, Ayatollah Khamenei and a bunch of other ratbags too... but he didn't because that would loose focus on Russian aggression and political gaslighting. Let's not forget they're LEADING the UN Security council at the moment. Just insane times
@@pineapplethief4418it does exist, American service member protection act. Bush literally had an outstanding order to invade Netherlands if any US soldier (and more importantly, politicians) get busted by ICC
Informative, but is it realy that simple? My Lai - what happend to the soliders?: Tried by a court-martial, Calley was found guilty of premeditated murder. The military jury sentenced him to be confined at hard labor for life, but his sentence was greatly reduced by senior officers after the trial. Moreover, except for Calley, all other soldiers escaped punishment for their misconduct at My Lai.14. mar. 2024 There were no weapons of mass destruction in Irak - who should be hold accountable, and why did it not happen? So does the US not act in the same way as the Russians? And historicly the US tried to overrule states in South - and Middle Amerika that the dig not lik. No this is not that simple.
It’s no surprise Russia views power structures the way it does. The Tsars always viewed the law as a tool to enforce the will of the autocrat, not as a mechanism to protect people.
"Tsars have always viewed the law as a tool for fulfilling the will of the autocrat, and not as a mechanism for protecting people" Aren't the "democratic" oligarchic CLANS of the United States doing the same thing?
Thank you for your clear words. Dictators like Putin, Netanyahu or Xi will only end their expansionist policy of aggression when an attack on a peaceful neighboring country is punished with loss of territory on the part of the attacker. Of course, this also presupposes that the so-called "international community of states" finally behaves in the same way and is not measuring by different standards. Whether Russia, Israel, China or the USA - whoever violates international law must be held accountable. If that doesn't happen, it's just smoke and mirrors.
Brilliant synopsis of what is really happening . Really appreciate your work. I have already voted in the UK election (by post) and voted to ensure that PUTINS INVASION MUST FAIL...as per House of Commons unanimous decision 24 feb 2022 Ukraine . Voted for the party with the best track record on Ukraine.
US does not recognise the ICC and did threat to invade Hague😂 Why should Russia obey? You people from west do see,you are not even 10% of the world Population? Do you? You are not representing the world😂
I've heard people from the Balkans jokingly call it the "Geneva Checklist", & I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it is in russia: putin sitting in his bunker like an evil little goblin crossing items off the list.
Man i don't know what to say, it's a weird tone to have when the US has sanctioned the ICC officials and their families for their judgement on IDF war crimes in Palestine, and previously for investigations into potential US war crimes in Afghanistan. It doesn't justify Russian actions of course, but they're not the only major power that has such disregard for the ICC or ICJ.
Hey, maybe I missed it. Could someone please timestamp the part of the video were he mentioned any of these arrest warrants issued by the ICC: Benjamin Netanyahu (Israeli Prime Minister) Yoav Gallant (Israeli Minister of Defence) Yahya Sinwar (head of Hamas in Gaza) Mohammed Deif (commander of Hamas’s military wing) Ismail Haniyeh (head of Hamas’s political bureau, based in Qatar).
@@anderspuck Let's just lay it out straight. Shall we. When it was Putin's arrest warrent, USA was very supportive of the ICC. But when it was Netanyahu's arrest warrent, suddenly USA doesn't think the ICC has jurisdiction. THAT has some pretty serious implecations regarding the topic of the video. Hence why it should have been mentioned.
@@shanerooney7288 Not sure how that is relevant for the topic of this video, but I do acknowledge that one could make another relevant video about that topic.
@@anderspuck The title of your video is _literally_ "Russia's view on the ICC and war crimes" It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the West's double standards on the ICC would influence Russia's views.
Russian understanding that a great power is above the law? There are so many flaws in this presentation. The ICC is an excellent idea, but it seems that EVERYONE who considers themselves great does not recognize it (US, Russia, India, China...). To conclude, as far as this is concerned, Russia behaves identically to other big countries, the fact that it is now fashionable to talk about Russia as if it is something special compared to others is another matter.
Even though the Russian arguments against the ICC are highly immorals, they are rather compiling when you take in account that the US are not part of the ICC juridiction and have themselves behave with neglate of international laws ( I'm thinking about the 2003 invasion of Iraq mainly )
The US feels the exact same way for the exact same reason. That's why there is the "invade the Hague act" and why the US congress came out so salty when the ICC and ICJ started asking for warrants for Netanyahu and members of his cabinet, granted they argue that it was about the courts trying to enforce warrants against non-signatories, but they hold the same great power beliefs, and commit war crimes every time they invade foreign nations just the same (just not as blatantly). Unless you believe that there were WMDs in Iraq? Ask Haiti or literally Any South American country or Cuba or roughly half of south east Asia or about a third of Africa. Don't get me wrong I am not in support of Putin or his way of thinking, I just believe that if you are going to call Russia out for this less than a month after almost the exact same thing (yes that's a heavy lifting almost) went down with Israel and the US and UK acted with self righteous indignation, and not speak to the similarities, is hypocritical at best
Interesting to compare the views of the ICC of the USA vs european nations. While the USA would agree with (most of?) the laws and rulings of the ICC, because we accept the underlying moral principles, we would not say that the ICC has any real authority over the USA, since that would undermine our sovereignty. I find it interesting that european nations don't have a problem accepting this supra-national body with authority over them. I wonder if one reason why this makes more sense to Europeans might be because they have a distant cultural memory of when there was a different supra-national authority in Europe which held nations and kings accountable when they had gravely violated the moral law: the papacy. The Pope did not have temporal authority over much of europe (just the papal states, while they existed) - but his religious authority over the spiritual and moral life of all Christians (before the Reformation) did give him some "enforcement mechanisms" against a king or a country who were committing war crimes, for instance. He could excommunicate that individual, or even place the whole country under interdict (no sacraments allowed to be given within that country until certain behavior was rectified). This was not done all that often, and of course, this system was as open to corruption and misuse as the ICC is. But It strikes me that the ICC is trying to fill the void, or a similar void, that was left after the Reformation and modern nation states eliminated this role of the papacy. The USA, being a new nation, has no cultural memory of this system ever existing - but I wonder if it is a factor in Europeans being willing to submit to the analgous system of the ICC.
When the ICC lawyers announced seeking an arrest order on israel, they were very clearly fearing for their lives, and half the western countries had top politicians damning them. USA has a law on the books requiring invading Hague if US or allied soldiers are arrested. "rules based order", sure.
You didn't get the point. The ICC goes after individuals. Like the guys who killed civilians on October, 7th. BTW did Hamass released the civilian hostages?
"they do war crimes on purpose" Thats an extraordinary thing to say. I feel that it needs further explaining and some specific evidence/case description. (it feels instinctively true, but thats not enough)
The thing is that they are different. And second thing is that the "rules based word order" is usually using the rules created in the West. So being fair is not the same as respect the same rules if they were created by one side.
It's as if Anders believes the US is an ardent supporter of the ICC, and that the American government happily submits to an international set of norms which limit its power. I don't understand how such an educated, intelligent person can make such patently absurd arguments. To be clear, I'm not saying that Russia should be let off the hook because the USA doesn't respect international norms. I'm saying that both countries (all countries) should be held responsible for gross violations of international law.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD The US is quite consistent on not recognizing the authority of any international body they don't hold special privilege over or can't ignore at will. I think the UN security council is the best example. If you know any significant examples to the countrary, I am all ears. I like to learn.
I believe the International Court would enjoy an amount of legitimacy if: 1) Small countries like Sudan and South Africa enforced its warrants instead of announcing they will distegard them, 2) The Court held both Asia, Europe and the United States accountable to the crimes of ecocide and domicide they commit through their conttibutions to climate change. As its stands: the Court is only there to 'punish' those regimes that don't align with the West, and the Court is undermined through the non-enforceability of its rulings anyway.
While ots not great that Russia is flaunting the ICC, its beyond embarrassing that the US also ignores it. (I'm American) Hypocrisy is one of the core tenets of US international behavior, and makes things like ICC toothless.
@@BratBugarinwho are you directing your copy and paste comment at, Vatnik? Does the Kommisar slip a few kopecs in your tin cup for every post even though they’re meaningless?m
Russia claims to be a UN member. Thereby arguing it's their agency as well. Either they are or they aren't, if they are they agreed to abided by international law, if they aren't it's time for them to stop having veto power on their claimed seat on the security council.
When the 'rules-based order' displays double standards and is used to impose unilateral sanctions on other nations, then that 'order' eventually falls apart, like what we're seeing.
I saw an article that said that the Russian invasion caused the collapse of the rules based international order, but it made no mention about the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.
While China, India, Israel, Russia, and the United States isn't members of the ICC, doesn't ICC then lost a great piece of it's purpose when these countries can do what they want anyway? 😅
@Anders Puck Nielsen • This video was very helpful. I understood that Russia wanted a different world order, but I didn't understand how they wanted it to work. Your explanation makes sense not just from the international perspective but also explains why the Russian people are so willing to accept oligarchs. This destruction of norms and institutions is easier for me to grasp on an international level, but I can finally see what the goal of the MAGA movement is. When you've been brought up to believe in equality, even if imperfect, it's hard to grasp that many, many other people reject that. I think President Zelensky's attempt to bring together countries of the world for his peace process becomes even more important. Unity among the smaller nations can make Russia's goal harder to achieve practically and intellectually. Thanks for another stimulating video.
@happyfelix1440 • I understood Anders to mean something more than just a redrawing of the map. I'm not familiar with Dr. Trenin's work, so I'll have to look into it. Thanks for the reference.
I love your work, Anders. Buuuut, I think this video was a bit idealistic. The ICC really has no power except when the prevailing powers work with it. Which they will do at their convenience and when it is in their interest. To be sure, the western powers will obey the international rule of law (to the extent that it exists) more than Russia and other autocratic nations. But it's not an accident that the US hasn't ratified the ICC. And if (for example), a French president were to be indicted by the ICC, is anyone under the delusion that said President would just be turned over? Of course not. That would be seen as an affront to that nation's sovereignty. The ICC is a nice idea, but at the moment, it really IS the political instrument that Russia and others are complaining that it is. Russia overstates the degree of control that the US and others wield, but neither is it some idyllic court just enforcing the law. I'm not suggesting that Russia is right to blow up dams, abduct children, steal from civilians, murder civilians, etc. But neither should we fool ourselves that the ICC or UN has any particular authority (moral or otherwise) beyond that given to it by whichever powers prevail in a particular situation. Russia's submission to the ICC will be a thing that will be traded and negotiated at the end of the war as just another item, like reparations, and where the new borders are. Perhaps someday it will evolve into a true supranational impartial court system who edicts carry weight and whose actions are truly seen as impartial and a matter of law. But right now it's a hope and a dream.
A big mistake we are making is to consider ruZsia as a State: it is not a State: it is a criminal and terrorist organization led by mafiosi. Have you ever met a mafioso who recognizes the laws and justice?
@@evgeniya7853 I'm laughing at your stupid comment which goes 100% against reality: 'every country has its mafia but in ruZsia it's the mafia that runs the country'
You are just a bitter old man with a life so unexciting that these power and war fantasies fuel you to write such non sense. Us young people are not interested in being wasted on the front against our russian brothers
This honestly feels like one of your not so good videos. It's ok and necessary to deliberately focus in on certain topics, forgoing surrounding circumstances. But for the sake of a balanced depiction of this topic, I think it's ludicrous to leave out the relationship between the US and the ICC. The issue is not so much Russia's relationship with the ICC. The issue is the relationship of any superpower with a supra- and international powerstructure. In this video, you present a very unbalanced view.
Our concept of sovereignty is the same as Russia's. It's just part of our political formula in the west to tell ourselves that it isn't, because it makes the non-sovereign nations, like mine and yours. feel bad, and people need to believe that we decide all of our states of exception through some process of moral impartiality instead of self interest. Can you bring the United States up on charges at the ICC? "Sovereign is he who decides on the state of exception" -Carl Schmitt
Fantastic Anders! The Kremlin will accept that we think we believe in these norms, but not that we actually believe in them.
Thanks, Vlad.
Given that their main adversory (US) has not ratified ICC, they know that we know it's only meant to be used to fry small fish.
You are censoring your comments, you don't believe in any norms that decent people uphold. Get lost.
@@Princip666 Begone, Hitler-worshipper
@@Princip666there is no mechanism for people who post comments to delete replies, learn how the internet works, you're embarrassing yourself
Well done Anders for keeping us focussed…
Not to mention keeping us laughing at the Rushin' military🤭
Cussed fo'sho
@@haughtyseven5053Not everybody's first language is English🤷♀️
One sided arguments. I would buy them if ICC prosecutes George W Bush and Tony Blair for the war on Iraq - provided USA ratifies the treaty.
Yep, focused on that one single country breaking IHL and the like...
Cause you're not supposed to look at other actors violating many, if not all, of those rules with impunity.
Russia is breaking the rules and getting punished for it; we're breaking the rules and getting away with it. Who do you think is making a better case for a "might makes right" world?
I feel I am well informed and have thought about the ramifications of all that I know is in play, then I hear another Anders podcast and realize there are more layers to that onion. Thanks Anders, I appreciate your insight 👍 From a former US naval aviator, now a Texas resident watching closely from afar.
I enjoy Anders' analyses on Danish TV - we have 2 channels, none of them are biased
I am glad that his points are accepted and appreciated by those of you who are in the loop
Now, what's the heck is going on with you?? 😕🤔
The ICC would carry more weight if it also had the ability to enforce against western nations like the US, and potentially Israel as well, given the US's response to the warrants the ICC issued against Israel. This is the fundamental problem...Russia isn't wrong that not all nations are treated equal by the ICC.
You should do one on the US view of the ICC. Which isn't generally too positive.
Yes, any credibility the ICC imagines it obtains by doing the right thing regarding Russian oligarchs won't balance out their debasement in issuing warrants for Israeli leadership.
Yup. The ICC vs the great powers is overall interesting (and none of the great powers come out in a positive light). The idea of sovereignty that Russia has (that international law is for lesser nations) is one that it shares with the US, China and India. The only "great power" that supports the ICC is the EU, but the EU isn't really a great power yet (it has the economic clout, but not the unity or the cohesive military clout).
Would be very interesting. Although, I do think there are valid concerns about bias, corruption, and the way the ICC is run.
@@hanrockabrand95The only bias is that the ICC has historically only gone against africa and south america- but it's only after it has threatened to prosecute the many crimes of Israel that it's suddenly "biased". Curious!
It’s clear. The US doesn’t like the idea of an international court being able to bring arrest warrants against former let alone current presidents.
Another aspect is the timing of the ICC. They just issued arrest warrents for Israeli ministers for specifically war crimes. ICC needed to show that they also persecute russians in a similar fashion. Your point on super powers wanting to do what they want is still standing though.
The problem with Russia's vision of the great powers making the rules and forcing other nations to bend to their will is that Russia has demonstrated that it isn't really a great power anymore.
Even if they were, "might makes right" is the wrong lesson to learn from the rise of international law and rule-making after the European wars in the 20th century.
@@fedos and the countries ruSSia bent over following WW2 are determined to never repeat that experience.
@@morstyrannis1951 In the end russia adopted hitlers naziism. They're the toilet of the planet.
@@morstyrannis1951meanwhile Russia is being bent over right now.
Actually John Mearsheimer also thinks in this way
Unfortunately the USA, has also not joined the ICC for similar reasons. In refusing to be subject to any external authority, which has some validity.
It goes against their constitution. Try to understand why Israel let the ICC. They got a reason to leave.
It's good that US isn't in the ICC, or they would have had to water it down like the UN.
Yes, see the "Hague Invasion Act".
And that is not to divert from the actual crimes commited by Russia, but one should see the world as it is.
ICC is just a joke and a puppet of the USA, everyone was convinced of this by the example of Netanyahu.
I don’t support the US joining the ICC, but not for the same reasons as Russia
As a matter of fact: The USA is not accepting the rulings from ICC about war crimes. Why?
Because they want to do whatever they want, and get away with it.
Because 'bad actors' who do not recognise liberal democratic principles can use the ICC as a weapon against those who do accept, follow, try to implement, and enforce, those principles. However, nothing involving people is perfect, so if you want to pick holes in Western principles then there is plenty of opportunities to do so. In my opinion it's a question of balance, intent, commitment, and transparancy, I would support Western attitudes and ideologies any day compared with the sort of medieval ideolgy of despotic and kleptocratic kingship, barrons, and princes, of the current Russian regime, who enslave their populations for the comfort and enrichment of themselves, and their dynasties, without laws or restraints on their power.
Because the supreme law of the US is the US Constitution and no external treaty or convention can supersede it. It's simple if you understand what sovereignty means.
@@yurinator4411 Supreme law is international law.If you do crimes on foreign soil,then you will get prosecuted by that country as well as the ICC and ICJ.
@@yurinator4411 with the side effect to submit war crimes without getting prosecuted.. eg torturing people - only to save democracy🤮
Stealing children is a particularly heinous crime. Even when you look at dictarships like the Junta in Argentina, which engaged in all manner of kidnapping and torture; these people managed to get themselves blanket immunity deals when they stepped down. Although immunity deals were eventually invalidated decades letter, some of the earlier prosecutions and outrage happened because of the stealing of children from victims of disappearances. The military did not have immunity for this specific crime because they either a) forgot to put into the immunity law but more likely, they b) just hoped nobody would notice. Putting child stealing on the immunity law would have raised some red flags. People might have asked how anyone could justify child snatching as a national security matter.
I'm not surprised that the first Russian crime against humanity highlighted by the international community was the child snatching, even though Moscow seems intent on violating every section of the Geneva Convention.
Should we not also remove Russia from the UN Security Council as some claim Russia did not ratify after the old Soviet regime feel in 1991 this making present sitting in UN Security Council illitimate also did they pay the membership fee for the the later years? As growing up after the war I still does not understand how the west have not been able to control or stop the invasion and barbarism of Russia I think it was one of the mandates of our modern and democratic world’s order 😰😰🤬Slava 🇺🇦🇩🇰🇨🇦👨🏼🦳
@@perchristophersen8966 "I still does not understand how the west have not been able to control or stop the invasion and barbarism of Russia" have you ever heard of "Nukes"" or are you living in lala land?
The manner in which Ukrainian children have been kidnapped reminds me of the Nazis when they first invaded Poland. In accordance with their instructions, they stole many children of so-called "Aryan appearance", with incalculable psychological effect on the victims.
Seems Russia is using the Geneva convention more as a checklist.
@@kevinfrancaissfkk8072too scared of nuke when every other country has them.
Russia doesn’t think great powers should be able to do what they want. They think Russia should be able to do whatever they want and don’t care beyond that
"The Rules Based Order" is a term used by the United States to avoid talking about International Law and the I.C.C. because they do not adhere to International Law nor recognize that institution. Your point stil stands regarding the Russian Federation, but "The Rules Based Order" is a misleading term which in reality means: Order Based on the Rules set by the United States.
While I always find your videos informative I thing this specific topic hits a VERY soft point on the west and especially the US in how Russian propaganda has been as succesfull as its has been. The war in Iraq was such a big blow to the understanding of international law that it has been very easy for countries like Russia and China to play the game of "whataboutism".
A bit odd, but also understandable, that Ru frames the ICC as "created by the west and the USA" when the USA voted against it after the negotiations about it.
Thank you, Anders Puck Nielsen, for another excellent analysis. Very much appreciated - and helpful, of course.
🇺🇦 Перемоги та миру всім українцям! 🇺🇦
Yes. Victory and peace for _all_ Ukrainians. Cheers from Copenhagen Oblast, Denmark. Слава Україні!
@@aleksanderfradkin7955 I would be a millionaire in russia just by selling my old used car and then moving there. Actually I'm planning on bying rubbles. To save money. I'm low on toilet paper and rubbles are slightly cheaper.
This is a great video. At first, I didn't really care about the Russian state's view of the ICC and wasn't planning on viewing the video. However, it's a very pertinent and interesting analysis and I'm very happy to have seen it. Great job!! 👍👍
Very insightful! Thanks Anders!
👏👏👏👊
Thank you, Jake for your own contributions. You have validly pointed out how a war in Ukraine is a threat to all of Europe.
Hahahahahahaha❤😂
If both of you have anything-human-with in you, you should travel to Crimea and Donbas and talk to locals... Before continuing to indoctrinatine the-sheep with-lie-based-hate-narative. Y-like this-deviation of reality simply because it makes Russians look bad. Have y-ever heard of coup in Ukraine, 16.000 Russian civillian casualties since 2014 coup, of wich 1500 were kids. Have y-ever heard of over one-MILLION Russians-expelled-from Ukraine since-unelected-nazis were installed by yr-wrstern"democracies"?
Just having fun, and watcing Puck deleting my comments systematicaly.. Hahahah❤😂
If both of you have anything-human-with in you, you should travel to Crimea and Donbas and talk to locals... Before continuing to indoctrinatine the-sheep with-lie-based-hate-narative. Y-like this-deviation of reality simply because it makes Russians look bad. Have y-ever heard of coup in Ukraine, 16.000 Russian civillian casualties since 2014 coup, of wich 1500 were kids. Have y-ever heard of over one-MILLION Russians-expelled-from Ukraine since-unelected-nazis were installed by yr-wrstern"democracies"???
You can't be a sovereign country if your internal laws are superseded or contradicted by laws from outside the country. This is obvious. The US has also withdrawn from the ICC for precisely that reason. China and India never signed it either. The largest/most powerful countries in the world are not members.
It's important to provide some context to the (ir)relevance of the ICC and of the UN, for that matter.
Probably shouldn't claim to be members of the United Nations then as they come with obligations
You would not find context here. A. P. Nielsen only presents facts that fit into the narrative.
@@nic.h The UN needs to be disbanded. Its predecessor, The League Of Nations, was a monumental failure also. One world governments and national sovereignty are mutually exclusive concepts.
Russia: we want to destroy the international legal order.
China: We want to retake Outer Manchuria from you.
Russia: No! Not like that!
😂😂😂😂
They will retake it. Just you wait..
is outer Manchuria more important to Russian that Ukraine? Not now I think.
If it means they can 'buy' something militarily valuable from the Chinese, Pute will hand over named territory voluntarily.
The Chinese are already grabbing resources in Eastern Russia. And the people there know it and are left poorer. So poor that they sign contracts and go to Ukraine 10,000 km away
Russia is a vassal state of China.
Russia has already ceded a river island on the border and are now about to cede land along the Tumen River.
"Why then has he floated the idea? That stretch of coastal access was ceded to Russia by the Ching dynasty in the 19th century and the PRC has wanted it back for decades."
Hi Anders. Good videos overall. I think it would be nice if you would add a picture of the mentioned person on the screen the first time you mention him in the video.
Analysis of such quality and critical insight is what i would love to see established as standard for public broadcast journalism. You're doing a great job, thank you.
Put propaganda instead of analysis and I would totally agree.
*_comment for the algorithm_*
~ 💞 Winston-Salem, NC
I completely agree with your analysis.
This fits their usage of lies, too. They use obvious lies as a demonstration of power. The "I know that you know that I know, that I'm lying, but you can't do anything against it."
Interesting aspect. Thanks!
Always something to learn...
Russia is NOT a member of the International Criminal Court and is not subject to any of their rulings. You have the brass neck to talk of Russian "crimes", when the International Court of Justice (to which all UN members are subject) has ruled that it is plausible that Israel is committing outright genocide in Gaza, and your own country, Anders Puck Nielsen, backs the genocide up to the hilt. Look at the two conflicts: the Ukraine where UN figures show civilian deaths are less than 2% of the total, or Gaza, where virtually all of the deaths are civilians. Which country is committing war crimes here? And yet Denmark, where Nielsen lives, backs genocide in Gaza, but claims to think there are war crimes in the Ukraine. Newsflash for those still awake: the UN has stated that the majority of "war crimes" at the front in the Ukraine are being conducted by the Ukrainian side, including summary execution of Russian prisoners. But you won't hear that on Nielsen's channel. Does this guy receive a cheque from the CIA?
Unfortunately America reacted equally in 2002 regarding warcrimes committed in Irak by Americans. They are also not member of the ICC. They made the "the Hague Invasion Act",
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act
This is, and still is violence (America) versus denial (Russia). America should just recognize the ICC and be a member.
This is what I came here to say. I agree with Ukrainians defending themselves and agree with other nations giving support. I just think these arguments need to at least be included in the discussion. I really wonder if Russia would have invaded all these countries if the US hadn’t invaded Iraq under false pretenses.
@@julianvandercook Russia should have taken issue and gained support against the US actions using the UN for its intended purposes. Instead they are using it as an invalid argument to "justify" their own criminal actions.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
@@nic.hROTFLMAO. Do you even remember what the world was like in 2000s? Colin Powell's performance was at the UN. Everyone was worried about an Islamic resurgeance. 'Cept Ukraine, which was busy filching natural gas from Russian pipelines meant for paying European customers.
@@julianvandercook Which countries exactly did Russia invade?
@@nic.h Do you call Articles 51, 106 and 107 of the UN Charter "criminal acts"?
These are exactly the UN Articles that Russia is currently IMPLEMENTING
Thanks for analysis, Anders. Sad news: Pete the medic, a South African helper in Ukraine just passed. He sustained fatal shrapnel wound while evacuating injured Ukrainian soldiers to safety. Totsiens boetie, en baie dankie vir alles...😞
What a waste of life.
Heroyam slava! Rest in peace, Pete my friend and inspiration 😿
If only the great powers have real sovereignty then why would the smaller countries support Russia's idea?
The world majority is made up of small countries or countries that have never been great powers and never will.
Aside from possibly the US, Russia and China every other country would be ceding their sovereignty in this world view.
That's more than 6 billion people and 200 countries.
Russia's position makes no sense.
General comment for the yt algorithm. Slava Ukraini!
To be fair, much as I am anti-Putin and pro-West, the US absolutely thinks it can act outside and above international law, as my home country (the UK) sometimes wishes it could. Russia maybe be more egregious and have less plausible justifications, but is not unique in this.
Just for the record: The US doesn't recognize the ICC either. Thanks for your great analysis once more!
And they’re right to do so. No court should ever be completely independent of legislative oversight.
@@Jaxck77what are your thoughts on the Nuremberg trials of Nazi war criminals? Should they all be pardoned posthumously? 🤮
@@Jaxck77 I would submit the USA did not ratify the treaty for essentially the same reason as Russia. Americans only like rules or laws that work in their favour.
@@vernonmcphee6746 True, same as india and china. They all want to keep playing Great power politics
@@Jaxck77They do have oversight. It's called the UNO General Assembly.
4:04 it would be so much more convincing if *both the US and Ukraine* would actually sign and ratify the documents around the ICC.
we can talk all day about the _rules-based world order_ but if important actors like the US or the country which wants support from all of us in their war against evil Russia don't bother to commit themselves to this rules-based world order, then what does it tell us about their true standing about these matters? do they really support the system❓
You always have great content Commander Nielsen. I sometimes take some issues with your interpretations or want to suggest some caveats or details you didn't get quite right. But in this case, I think your message is 100% accurate, valid and precise. It is important too, because the Russo-Ukrainian war isn't just a war. As you say: it is an ideological struggle, a continuation of the Cold War in many ways. This is why it is VITAL that Ukraine achieves as total of a victory as is humanly possible and that simple "defeat" of the Putin regime is unlikely to be adequate. The Russian Federation needs to be defeated to such an extent that it undergoes, whether as a result of internal or external pressure, major reforms which insure that another regime like the Putin regime never again emerges in the Russian Federation of any of its constituent states.
Amen to that.
It is for the Russian PEOPLE to decide which "regime" to be in the country... And not to the descendants of the Nazis
The UN Charter, in Articles 106 and 107, gives the right to the winners of the Second World War - the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and China - to apply all measures against the countries that fought against them to prevent actions aimed at revising the results of the Second World War. In particular, it is possible to use military force against these countries. To do this, it is enough to notify the other three winning countries, but not to get their consent.
Forceful coercion of countries that want to revise the Yalta-Potsdam system in Europe can also be carried out by Russia, which is the legal successor of the USSR.
Russia can stop attempts to revive Nazism in Germany, Hungary, Romania, Austria, Bulgaria, Finland, Croatia, Slovenia, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Italy, Spain, Norway, Denmark, Holland, Japan.
Articles 106 and 107 of the UN Charter also apply to all those countries that refuse to inherit from the USSR - Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania. Their attitude that there was a Soviet occupation and the treaties of Friendship and cooperation concluded by them with the Third Reich move these countries into the ranks of the Hitlerite coalition. The same position is taken by modern Ukraine, which accepts as its predecessor the military-political formations of the OUN-UPA, created by Ukrainian fascists. Proves that all these post-Soviet republics belong to the Hitlerite coalition. Hence the possibility of revising the territorial acquisitions of countries that position themselves as supporters of the Hitlerite coalition. Plus SPONSORS OF the Nazi regimes (USA and Britain)
@@evgeniya7853 International law says any country can take territory from Russia and Russia can in turn go f*ck herself. Don't believe me? Watch this.
There is no freedom of speech in Russia.. That's why the families of United Russia have real estate in NATO countries.
Russia's population is shrinking and that isn't changing soon. Russia's days as a dominating great power are numbered just from that. They'd be better off being good neighbors and team players, but no, they want to be the empire they used to be
Paper is patient - a dutch saying. Ironicly, it gains international allure by the use by Anne Frank, a Jewish girl and war victim. In this case, it means justice is a time game. We have to wait.
the wheels of justice grind slow but surely ....is the english equivalent ...criminals always think that they can escape but the legal system never sleeps , it just changes shift and once your name is on the list , they will find you
@@Bob-nd2mrSometimes those wheels grind too slowly, and the guilty have blissfully died in their own beds, rather than face any justice.
Hej Anders, tak for dine informative UA-cam's. Jeg har været inde ICC's hjemmeside, hvor jeg har bemærket at mange store lande ikke har tilsluttet sig aftalen - heriblandt USA, ved du hvorfor at de netop ikke er med?
Thank you so much All the best from Sweden
Please make the same assessment about US view on the ICC..
this will be even more interesting as the US considers itself the safer of justice... 😊
greetings from germany 🇩🇪…love your analysis! 💪🏼
Ditto
Dictators have a problem not with international law, but law in general. Putin and Xi don't want to be restricted by domestic laws either...
Serbia claimed that they don't recognized international court....Then they handed over Milosevic, Karadjic, Mladic etc as they become more of a liability then an asset and heroes.
Yes, US citizens will also EXTRADITE their criminals in accordance with international anti-terrorism legislation...
Umådeligt interessant. Du må gerne give lidt mere baggrund om ICC. Hvad med Kina? Er de et medlem?
Thanks for the update and views 🇺🇲🇺🇦
Oklahoma USA 🇺🇦🇺🇲
Note that the US and Russia both agree on the role of the ICC in enforcing international laws against great powers. The difference of opinion is on whether russia is a great power.
Fascinating explanation of the Russian mindset.
Simultaneous grandiosity and victim mentality
This has nothing to do with the Russian mentality. These are your own ideas, mirrored in Russian
Anders Puck Nielsen and Jade McGlynn both have superb understanding on that topic, each in their own way.
@@larsrons7937 no they do not, they just tell you what you are willing to hear, that makes you easier to agree with them.
The russian mindset is a mix of Soviet nostalgia, fear, and desperation turning into aggression.
*With The Russian Plane Parked beside D.Trump's Plane - How many National Security Documents did D.Trump give to Putin ? Photocopied ? Thumb Drives ?*
I think the most absurd idea in the whole thing is that Russa consider itself as a great power. It's not. By Russia logic, Moscow should submit to Washington and Beijing.
But theyre going to take _Kyiv in THREE DAYS!_ 😂
They confuse 'being powerful' with 'being a jerk'. This is why they have no friends, and why they will fail with their goals.
Russia may only have the GDP of Belgium, but it also has nuclear weapons which we are afraid of. Just saying. 🇺🇦🇬🇧
@@AtlasAnderssonIf that were the only criterion, then Serbia would qualify for the "great power" status too. 🙊
They are well on their way to becoming a vassal of China, they just haven't realized this yet.
Unfortunately the USA and a lot of other states don't accept the ICC either, which is really a downfall.
Russia Delenda Est.
Federatio Russia delenda est
@@jean-michelvanpruyssen936 the Russians know that this is the West's goal all too well to believe that coexistence with the West is possible
Brilliant analysis and insights.
By just replacing "Russia" and "Putin" with another "country" and "president" I got the full picture. 🍉
Anders to say that some other big power commit crimes and never take responsibility for war crimes,,,, you dont going to see these ever.
The funniest words that can be put together in the present day... "Great power" & "russia" hilarious! Fantastic comedy! Made my week!!! 😂🤣😂
The Russian military is a complete and total, 100% JOKE. They are losing to tiny Ukraine, Ukraine didnt even have an army 4 years ago.
Yes, it's just a country of 11 time zones and 6000 nukes, no big deal.
@@Tom_Quixote You'd think they'd be able to take more than 10% of tiny Ukraine. Yet Rusha' still loses🤭
USA couldn’t even beat the Taliban lol so relax.
Very interesting! As has been pointed out already, Russia is not the only country that doesn't recognize the ICC. The USA even has an 'The Hague Invasion Act' that could theoretically turn this (otherwise rather boring) city into a war zone. They also seem to think that international law is something for small countries...
As always, Anders, you have given an excellent video. Great analysis.
Unfortunately it has already undermined the court's authority that the US has never been held accountable for obvious crimes.. Rules need to apply to everyone 🤔😟
Unbelievable that Russia has the nerve to call itself civilized.
Maybe in the imperialistic meaning of "civilization": the greater the power and the ruled territory, the greater the civilization.
So it's in the power sense, not in the moral sense.
Seethe and cope.
Unbelievable that EU , UK and USA has the nerve to call themselves civilized.
@@Princip666 I mean, it's a country that collectively worships Hitler whilst 20% of their population shits in holes due to a lack of sanitary infrastructure.
@@6teeth318-w5k At least they don't worship Hitler like russians.
The rules based World order 'disadvantages' those powers who want to expand by brute force rather than through others complicity. Rightly or wrongly, the greatest power is exerted by big individual or groups of nation states, threatening and using overwhelming military force. This outmatches the power of any 'international court'.
Tak Anders
Altid en fornøjelse med dine gennemtænkte analyser 👍
Helt enig!
Ditto her.
Russia seems a middle age country in third millennium
Hope will change soon
Putin to General: Did you take Kyiv in three days?
General: No.
Putin: Did you take Kherson, Odessa, Kharkiv?
General: No.
Putin: Well then, what did you take in Ukraine?!
General: _Three washing machines, two toilets, and a fur coat!_
😂
@Goenzoy87 He did say "Kyiv in three days."
Don't forget they also stole that raccoon from the Kherson zoo
@bootsa876 There are clips of him screaming it all over the internet.
Zelensky is on a visit to the doctor for examination for illnes. So he ask the doctor: "doc, do i have vovchansk ? No, says doc, you do not have vovchansk...Well doc, do i have kharkiv ? Doc answers: you do have kharkiv, but it will go away soon....🤣😅😂
@@james82184 Nobody wants raccoons anyway😆
I think you are probably right, that Russia sees itself above the rule of law. If that is because they are a "great power".. That leads to 2 options.
Either
1) Russia comes to it's senses and understands that the rules apply to everyone or
2) Russia will need to cease being a great power so they will have to submit to the rules based order.
I think they think option 1 is impossible because they don't even have a rules based order in their own country. Therefore option 2 is the only one that is possible, indeed probable.
3)Russia only do what USA all ready done many times in Iraq and Afghanistan and Yugoslavia and LIbya, committing war crimes knowing that ICC dont have any jurisdiction to arrest any USA official .
Interestng. I can see the Russian argument. Its not like the USA or China gives any real credence to any international supernational institution if it goes against their interests. In a way it is a true observation of the world that '"great powers" play by their own ruels'.
A world which we want to leave behind
@@henriikkak2091I agree for sure, but I doubt the USA or China agrees.
@@henriikkak2091 You may want to, but it's reality and eventually reality bites. 🇺🇦🇬🇧
Well said. 🇺🇦🇬🇧
The evil Russians are obviously completely and totally in the right on this... ... ... if they manage to win
I followed this channel to get an unbiased coverage, but I guess I gotta keep searching. Not once it was mentioned, that in the international order USA is always above the law. It's a simple truth, why not include that?
I'm not defending anything here, it's just twists the perspective to ignore that.
You should have tied this to Netanyahu and Galant and US. US because they actually have a law which says that US can invade the Hague if it is accused of war crimes.
"law which says that US can invade the Hague"
lol
He could have tied it to Kim Jong Un, Ayatollah Khamenei and a bunch of other ratbags too... but he didn't because that would loose focus on Russian aggression and political gaslighting. Let's not forget they're LEADING the UN Security council at the moment. Just insane times
Which clauses in the US law are you refering to?
@@futte8024en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act#:~:text=820%2C%20enacted%20August%202%2C%202002,criminal%20court%20to%20which%20the
@@pineapplethief4418it does exist, American service member protection act. Bush literally had an outstanding order to invade Netherlands if any US soldier (and more importantly, politicians) get busted by ICC
Informative, but is it realy that simple?
My Lai - what happend to the soliders?:
Tried by a court-martial, Calley was found guilty of premeditated murder. The military jury sentenced him to be confined at hard labor for life, but his sentence was greatly reduced by senior officers after the trial. Moreover, except for Calley, all other soldiers escaped punishment for their misconduct at My Lai.14. mar. 2024
There were no weapons of mass destruction in Irak - who should be hold accountable, and why did it not happen?
So does the US not act in the same way as the Russians?
And historicly the US tried to overrule states in South - and Middle Amerika that the dig not lik.
No this is not that simple.
It’s no surprise Russia views power structures the way it does. The Tsars always viewed the law as a tool to enforce the will of the autocrat, not as a mechanism to protect people.
"Tsars have always viewed the law as a tool for fulfilling the will of the autocrat, and not as a mechanism for protecting people"
Aren't the "democratic" oligarchic CLANS of the United States doing the same thing?
Thank you for your clear words. Dictators like Putin, Netanyahu or Xi will only end their expansionist policy of aggression when an attack on a peaceful neighboring country is punished with loss of territory on the part of the attacker. Of course, this also presupposes that the so-called "international community of states" finally behaves in the same way and is not measuring by different standards. Whether Russia, Israel, China or the USA - whoever violates international law must be held accountable. If that doesn't happen, it's just smoke and mirrors.
Brilliant synopsis of what is really happening . Really appreciate your work. I have already voted in the UK election (by post) and voted to ensure that PUTINS INVASION MUST FAIL...as per House of Commons unanimous decision 24 feb 2022 Ukraine .
Voted for the party with the best track record on Ukraine.
I live in the UK and I don't know which party you are referring to. Please clarify.
US does not recognise the ICC and did threat to invade Hague😂
Why should Russia obey?
You people from west do see,you are not even 10% of the world Population?
Do you?
You are not representing the world😂
Russian soldiers be like 'I thought it was the Geneva Achievements😮'
I've heard people from the Balkans jokingly call it the "Geneva Checklist", & I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it is in russia: putin sitting in his bunker like an evil little goblin crossing items off the list.
Man i don't know what to say, it's a weird tone to have when the US has sanctioned the ICC officials and their families for their judgement on IDF war crimes in Palestine, and previously for investigations into potential US war crimes in Afghanistan.
It doesn't justify Russian actions of course, but they're not the only major power that has such disregard for the ICC or ICJ.
Hey, maybe I missed it.
Could someone please timestamp the part of the video were he mentioned any of these arrest warrants issued by the ICC:
Benjamin Netanyahu (Israeli Prime Minister)
Yoav Gallant (Israeli Minister of Defence)
Yahya Sinwar (head of Hamas in Gaza)
Mohammed Deif (commander of Hamas’s military wing)
Ismail Haniyeh (head of Hamas’s political bureau, based in Qatar).
It's a video about how Russia looks at the ICC. There are many things that the video is not about.
@@anderspuck
Let's just lay it out straight. Shall we.
When it was Putin's arrest warrent, USA was very supportive of the ICC.
But when it was Netanyahu's arrest warrent, suddenly USA doesn't think the ICC has jurisdiction.
THAT has some pretty serious implecations regarding the topic of the video. Hence why it should have been mentioned.
@@shanerooney7288 Not sure how that is relevant for the topic of this video, but I do acknowledge that one could make another relevant video about that topic.
@@anderspuck
The title of your video is _literally_ "Russia's view on the ICC and war crimes"
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the West's double standards on the ICC would influence Russia's views.
@@shanerooney7288 Whataboutism doesn't help.
Russian understanding that a great power is above the law? There are so many flaws in this presentation. The ICC is an excellent idea, but it seems that EVERYONE who considers themselves great does not recognize it (US, Russia, India, China...). To conclude, as far as this is concerned, Russia behaves identically to other big countries, the fact that it is now fashionable to talk about Russia as if it is something special compared to others is another matter.
Really excellent account, lucid and helpful as always.
Even though the Russian arguments against the ICC are highly immorals, they are rather compiling when you take in account that the US are not part of the ICC juridiction and have themselves behave with neglate of international laws ( I'm thinking about the 2003 invasion of Iraq mainly )
USA and ICC when?
For what?
@@michaeldunham3385
ua-cam.com/video/RM0uvgHKZe8/v-deo.htmlsi=2guLCKd5yWHOIgX3
@@michaeldunham3385ua-cam.com/video/RM0uvgHKZe8/v-deo.htmlsi=2guLCKd5yWHOIgX3
The US feels the exact same way for the exact same reason. That's why there is the "invade the Hague act" and why the US congress came out so salty when the ICC and ICJ started asking for warrants for Netanyahu and members of his cabinet, granted they argue that it was about the courts trying to enforce warrants against non-signatories, but they hold the same great power beliefs, and commit war crimes every time they invade foreign nations just the same (just not as blatantly). Unless you believe that there were WMDs in Iraq? Ask Haiti or literally Any South American country or Cuba or roughly half of south east Asia or about a third of Africa. Don't get me wrong I am not in support of Putin or his way of thinking, I just believe that if you are going to call Russia out for this less than a month after almost the exact same thing (yes that's a heavy lifting almost) went down with Israel and the US and UK acted with self righteous indignation, and not speak to the similarities, is hypocritical at best
The theft of children is so execrable.
Like the US under Trump?
Enlighten us dumb peasants what kids did Trump steal? Credible sources would be appreciated
Since when evacuating orphans from the warzone is a bad thing?
@yellowtunes2756 since russia is the cause of the war zone and it put those children in concentration camps
@@NeungView Trump stole children ? Cool story. Any references ... other than Russian.
Interesting to compare the views of the ICC of the USA vs european nations. While the USA would agree with (most of?) the laws and rulings of the ICC, because we accept the underlying moral principles, we would not say that the ICC has any real authority over the USA, since that would undermine our sovereignty. I find it interesting that european nations don't have a problem accepting this supra-national body with authority over them. I wonder if one reason why this makes more sense to Europeans might be because they have a distant cultural memory of when there was a different supra-national authority in Europe which held nations and kings accountable when they had gravely violated the moral law: the papacy. The Pope did not have temporal authority over much of europe (just the papal states, while they existed) - but his religious authority over the spiritual and moral life of all Christians (before the Reformation) did give him some "enforcement mechanisms" against a king or a country who were committing war crimes, for instance. He could excommunicate that individual, or even place the whole country under interdict (no sacraments allowed to be given within that country until certain behavior was rectified). This was not done all that often, and of course, this system was as open to corruption and misuse as the ICC is. But It strikes me that the ICC is trying to fill the void, or a similar void, that was left after the Reformation and modern nation states eliminated this role of the papacy. The USA, being a new nation, has no cultural memory of this system ever existing - but I wonder if it is a factor in Europeans being willing to submit to the analgous system of the ICC.
When the ICC lawyers announced seeking an arrest order on israel, they were very clearly fearing for their lives, and half the western countries had top politicians damning them. USA has a law on the books requiring invading Hague if US or allied soldiers are arrested. "rules based order", sure.
You didn't get the point. The ICC goes after individuals. Like the guys who killed civilians on October, 7th.
BTW did Hamass released the civilian hostages?
Source?
@@zacklewis342 look up "invade Hague act"
@@zacklewis342 Try the Herculean task of googling Invade Hague Act
@@zacklewis342 I've tried providing it twice, but the comment keeps being deleted. Try searching for some of the words I've used.
"they do war crimes on purpose" Thats an extraordinary thing to say. I feel that it needs further explaining and some specific evidence/case description. (it feels instinctively true, but thats not enough)
To set this in simple terms, Russia wants us to undersand them but they don't need to understand us. That makes things complicated...
The thing is that they are different. And second thing is that the "rules based word order" is usually using the rules created in the West. So being fair is not the same as respect the same rules if they were created by one side.
It's as if Anders believes the US is an ardent supporter of the ICC, and that the American government happily submits to an international set of norms which limit its power. I don't understand how such an educated, intelligent person can make such patently absurd arguments. To be clear, I'm not saying that Russia should be let off the hook because the USA doesn't respect international norms. I'm saying that both countries (all countries) should be held responsible for gross violations of international law.
It's somewhat unsetteling that some of the analysis also applies to the hostility of the US towards the ICC.
All of it does. The US wants rules for everyone except themselves.
@@Simon-ow6td The US went back and forth on the ICC based on the president being a Democrat or Republican. Stop acting like it's a constant policy.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD The US is quite consistent on not recognizing the authority of any international body they don't hold special privilege over or can't ignore at will. I think the UN security council is the best example. If you know any significant examples to the countrary, I am all ears. I like to learn.
I guess the WTO is the only meaningful example I can come up with?
I believe the International Court would enjoy an amount of legitimacy if: 1) Small countries like Sudan and South Africa enforced its warrants instead of announcing they will distegard them, 2) The Court held both Asia, Europe and the United States accountable to the crimes of ecocide and domicide they commit through their conttibutions to climate change.
As its stands: the Court is only there to 'punish' those regimes that don't align with the West, and the Court is undermined through the non-enforceability of its rulings anyway.
Really nice to see a bit more videos from you lately. Thank you alot.
While ots not great that Russia is flaunting the ICC, its beyond embarrassing that the US also ignores it. (I'm American) Hypocrisy is one of the core tenets of US international behavior, and makes things like ICC toothless.
No more Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky. Russia is now Mordor of fear, mobilization and alcohol
I am Russian. It's always been this way, to be true🤷♀️
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.
@@BratBugarin You're talking about Putin's "Kyiv in 3 days"?
If you say so... Clearly you haven't read either
@@BratBugarinwho are you directing your copy and paste comment at, Vatnik? Does the Kommisar slip a few kopecs in your tin cup for every post even though they’re meaningless?m
Thanks for a very useful summary of the Russian perspective. described without any ambiguity.
“The supreme art of war is to undermine the enemy's agencies, authority, and education.” ― Sun Pu, The Art of Maskirovka
Russia claims to be a UN member. Thereby arguing it's their agency as well.
Either they are or they aren't, if they are they agreed to abided by international law, if they aren't it's time for them to stop having veto power on their claimed seat on the security council.
Extremely helpful - had never considered this. Thank you
When the 'rules-based order' displays double standards and is used to impose unilateral sanctions on other nations, then that 'order' eventually falls apart, like what we're seeing.
I saw an article that said that the Russian invasion caused the collapse of the rules based international order, but it made no mention about the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.
While China, India, Israel, Russia, and the United States isn't members of the ICC, doesn't ICC then lost a great piece of it's purpose when these countries can do what they want anyway? 😅
@Anders Puck Nielsen • This video was very helpful. I understood that Russia wanted a different world order, but I didn't understand how they wanted it to work. Your explanation makes sense not just from the international perspective but also explains why the Russian people are so willing to accept oligarchs.
This destruction of norms and institutions is easier for me to grasp on an international level, but I can finally see what the goal of the MAGA movement is.
When you've been brought up to believe in equality, even if imperfect, it's hard to grasp that many, many other people reject that.
I think President Zelensky's attempt to bring together countries of the world for his peace process becomes even more important. Unity among the smaller nations can make Russia's goal harder to achieve practically and intellectually.
Thanks for another stimulating video.
The Russian goal is a new Jalta or the 1815 congress. D. Trenin wrote about it a lot.
@happyfelix1440 • I understood Anders to mean something more than just a redrawing of the map. I'm not familiar with Dr. Trenin's work, so I'll have to look into it. Thanks for the reference.
What does the collapse of US hegemony and the building of a world with MULTIPLE poles of power have to do with International institutions?
Thanks Anders, please make a video, on Putins latest comments that Denmark are employing Mid-range ballestic missiles????
This is interesting to understand the difference in definition of sovereignty in the West vs. in Russia.
What's difderence?
I love your work, Anders. Buuuut, I think this video was a bit idealistic. The ICC really has no power except when the prevailing powers work with it. Which they will do at their convenience and when it is in their interest. To be sure, the western powers will obey the international rule of law (to the extent that it exists) more than Russia and other autocratic nations. But it's not an accident that the US hasn't ratified the ICC. And if (for example), a French president were to be indicted by the ICC, is anyone under the delusion that said President would just be turned over? Of course not. That would be seen as an affront to that nation's sovereignty.
The ICC is a nice idea, but at the moment, it really IS the political instrument that Russia and others are complaining that it is. Russia overstates the degree of control that the US and others wield, but neither is it some idyllic court just enforcing the law.
I'm not suggesting that Russia is right to blow up dams, abduct children, steal from civilians, murder civilians, etc. But neither should we fool ourselves that the ICC or UN has any particular authority (moral or otherwise) beyond that given to it by whichever powers prevail in a particular situation. Russia's submission to the ICC will be a thing that will be traded and negotiated at the end of the war as just another item, like reparations, and where the new borders are.
Perhaps someday it will evolve into a true supranational impartial court system who edicts carry weight and whose actions are truly seen as impartial and a matter of law. But right now it's a hope and a dream.
A big mistake we are making is to consider ruZsia as a State: it is not a State: it is a criminal and terrorist organization led by mafiosi. Have you ever met a mafioso who recognizes the laws and justice?
Aren't you laughing at the nonsense you've written? Were you hit on the head with a shovel during an argument in the sandbox?😂
@@evgeniya7853 I'm laughing at your stupid comment which goes 100% against reality: 'every country has its mafia but in ruZsia it's the mafia that runs the country'
You are just a bitter old man with a life so unexciting that these power and war fantasies fuel you to write such non sense. Us young people are not interested in being wasted on the front against our russian brothers
This honestly feels like one of your not so good videos. It's ok and necessary to deliberately focus in on certain topics, forgoing surrounding circumstances. But for the sake of a balanced depiction of this topic, I think it's ludicrous to leave out the relationship between the US and the ICC. The issue is not so much Russia's relationship with the ICC. The issue is the relationship of any superpower with a supra- and international powerstructure. In this video, you present a very unbalanced view.
so informative
Our concept of sovereignty is the same as Russia's.
It's just part of our political formula in the west to tell ourselves that it isn't, because it makes the non-sovereign nations, like mine and yours. feel bad, and people need to believe that we decide all of our states of exception through some process of moral impartiality instead of self interest.
Can you bring the United States up on charges at the ICC?
"Sovereign is he who decides on the state of exception" -Carl Schmitt