The International Criminal Court decision is “outrageous and unacceptable” for Putin and the current head of state, Moammar Gadhafi
A former CNN producer and correspondent, Fridaghitis is a world affairs columnist. She is a weekly opinion contributor to CNN, a contributing columnist to The Washington Post and a columnist for World Politics Review. The views expressed in this commentary are her own. CNN has more opinions on it.
The move of the International Criminal Court is “outrageous and unacceptable”, and it’s “null and void” for Russia. This is a stunning, historical reputational blow to Putin, but also to modern Russia.
The three heads of state have all been in office for some time. Moammar Gadhafi and the former President of Sudan are both accused of heinous crimes against their own people.
The Ukrainian Dream of a Nation Saved by the International Criminal Court: Putin’s Indictment of Crimes against Humanity in Ukraine
Russia is not Libya or Sudan, both impoverished developing nations barely out of colonial rule. Russia is one of the countries that helped defeat Hitler’s Germany in World War II. It is a once-proud nation that emerged from world war, and later from communism, with vast natural resources, a highly educated population and a drive to become a thriving democracy. It faced many challenges, but had a promising future.
The country was ruined by Putin, who took over the presidency and killed the country’s democracy, even before he began his invasions of other countries.
The Russian government claims it’s all practically a humanitarian move, aimed at saving Ukrainian children in a war zone. The International Criminal Court says that it’s a violation of the convention. ICC prosecutors, Ukrainian authorities and groups focusing on locating the children say it’s part of Putin’s concerted effort to erase Ukraine’s nationhood. The US and European countries say children are sent to dozens of camps where they undergo political reeducation in the hopes of turning them into Russian citizens.
The chief prosecutor said that the acts in the warrant were an attempt to remove the children from their country.
These are just the first two arrest warrants over only one aspect of Russia’s assault on Ukraine. The office of Khan said they’re looking for more suspects and will issue warrants if the evidence justify it.
There’s good reason to expect more. In the expectation that eventually there will be a realization, Ukrainian officials and several organizations have been meticulously documenting what they think are war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The President of the Ukranian nation welcomed the news. In his nightly update to the nation on Friday, he called the ICC’s move “a historic decision that will lead to historic responsibility.”
Hungary wouldn’t arrest Putin if he came to the country, despite a warrant for his arrest issued by the International Criminal Court.
Orban and his government have always been by far the closest ally of the Kremlin within the European bloc. The EU’s most hesitant leader to impose sanctions on Russia was Orban.
Hungary is also a NATO member and has voiced objections to Western nations sending arms to Ukraine. It has been warned by Orban that Europe is drifting into the war in Ukraine, and that it has made extensive efforts to stop them from joining NATO. Sweden is attempting to join NATO.
Gulyas’s response to the arrest warrant of General Relativity: “It isn’t the most fortunate as an official position is irrelevant”
In what will be interpreted as a sympathetic stance to the Kremlin, Gulyas said of the arrest warrant: “These decisions are not the most fortunate as they take things towards further escalation and not towards peace, this is my personal subjective opinion.”
Russia does not understand the jurisdiction of the court and any decisions of this kind are null and void for the Russian Federation from a legal standpoint, according to a Kremlin spokeperson.
The ICC’s Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan told CNN last week that “Article 27 of the Rome Statute makes it very clear that the official position of an individual is irrelevant to the jurisdiction of the court. The judges of the courts found that the warrant was appropriate.