July 17 marked World Day for International Criminal Justice. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio pledged to dismantle the International Criminal Court. Following the announcement, fear spread through the community. However, D. Wes Rist argues that the fight against atrocities is not dead.
Rist suggests the reaction to the pledge amounts to a premature obituary for the discipline. He believes the focus on response and recovery—humanitarian aid and cease-fires—represents only one part of the strategy. The most effective work occurs upstream, preventing violence before it begins.
This type of prevention rarely looks like dramatic response efforts. Such work makes it difficult to justify within government budgets.
Rist notes that governments are often resistant to the term “atrocity” unless a situation is already in flames. To secure buy-in, the discipline historically relied on showing the direct link between early warning signs and mass violence. This is difficult to prove.
Related: Nepa Rules Aim to Streamline Reactor Licensing
He proposes a different approach: framing this concept as a matter of national security and economic stability.
Rist points to the UN General Assembly debate on the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) from July 6. Fifty states and two regional organizations participated in the discussion. While there was division, many nations referenced the UN Secretary-General’s report on implementing R2P. The EU and others used the forum to reaffirm their support for the ICC.
The author suggests that the lingering interest in these doctrines proves the community is adaptable. Rather than mourning the ICC’s reputation, advocates should use the current “transactional” international relations environment to their advantage. By demonstrating that stopping atrocities prevents terrorism and economic collapse, they can make the case that prevention is in the best interest of every state.
In practice, this means funding a school in a volatile region is not just charity. It serves as a strategic buffer against the chaos that international courts eventually have to clean up. The argument holds that preventing the chaos is cheaper and more effective than cleaning it up later.
Related: SRA ethics training plans called unnecessary and prescriptive
This approach potentially saves states from the instability that fuels human trafficking and terrorist recruitment.
Rist references a report from the Genocide Prevention Task Force, chaired by Madeleine Albright and William Cohen, which noted that atrocities fuel instability and damage spillover effects globally. He argues this self-interested perspective is not a detriment to the endeavor, but rather an entrée into state decision-making. Even as foreign assistance budgets shrink, the “cost of mass atrocities” remains a compelling argument for continued engagement.
Rist concludes by citing Mark Twain. Like Twain, the sector must continue fighting, even when its ideas are controversial. He urges professionals not to let the rumor of the discipline’s demise stop their efforts.
Building a safer world remains the ultimate goal despite the rumors.
