US national security adviser John Bolton’s speech attacking the International Criminal Court (ICC) was another brick in the wall of the Fortress America foreign policy that the Trump administration is trying to build.

Why John Bolton is much more like Trump than some think | Cas Mudde Read more

Politicians and pundits scratched their heads as Bolton gave his first major speech in his current job not on the challenge of a rising China, aggression by Russia, terrorism or the humanitarian catastrophe in Syria, but instead on an international legal body to which the US is not even a party.

The speech was more significant for its symbolism than for substance. The goal of the speech was to send yet another message that under the Trump administration, the US will not be bound by rules, and will do what it pleases.

This is the theme of Trump’s foreign policy. From announcing the intent to withdraw the US from the Paris climate agreement to scrapping the Iran nuclear deal to a relentless assault on trade agreements, the Trump administration believes that international agreements – especially ones not negotiated by this administration – constrain US power and must be shed. Even US alliances with European and Asian countries come under withering attacks from a president who believes that these partnerships are mere protection rackets.

This is Trump’s Fortress America foreign policy. Pull up the drawbridge. Man the ramparts with the military. Send out skirmishing teams and disregard the consequences of their actions.

Sign up to receive the latest US opinion pieces every weekday

The ways in which Trump’s isolationist foreign policy will damage US national security are manifold. International agreements are pillars of international peace and stability. Climate change requires all countries working together to reduce emissions. Russia and China cannot be deterred without US alliances. Without a deal in place, Iran is more likely to get a nuclear weapon.

International agreements make the US more powerful, not less. The US is the only global power with economic interests, troops and responsibilities all over the world – and international agreements protect those interests.

No international agreement is perfect. But even if one believes that the world of international politics is inherently anarchic, today’s world pales in comparison with the chaos of a world where there are no rules.

Like many international agreements, the Rome Statute that created the ICC is far from ideal, and US administrations of both parties have been skeptical. However, the ICC is an attempt to build a better world by creating a mechanism to deter atrocities and hold to account leaders that commit heinous crimes. There are currently 123 countries party to the ICC, which has convicted Congolese warlords, is currently trying the former leader of Ivory Coast for crimes against humanity, and issued an arrest warrant for the leader of Sudan for committing genocide in Darfur. Other international courts have convicted the former Liberian president Charles Taylor and Serbian leader Radovan Karadžić, while the Serbian president Slobodan Milošević died in jail awaiting trial in The Hague.

Of course, there are real challenges with the ICC. The ICC has not deterred atrocities like those in Syria and Myanmar, and the ICC so far can’t arrest the sitting Sudanese president. And with troops stationed all over the world and a role as a pillar of global peace – which often necessitates the use of force – the US must regularly grapple with how its personnel are treated abroad.

The Trump administration believes that the US is not only special but also has no responsibilities abroad

Speculation that the ICC prosecutor might open an investigation of US personnel over allegations of war crimes relating to Afghanistan also creates legal issues for the US. But no matter what approach the US takes towards the ICC, it is clear that the country should abide by its international legal obligations like the law of war and respect the commitments other countries make to international courts like the ICC to advance respect for international law.

There is a vigorous debate about how the US can work with the ICC while also protecting its personnel. But instead of dealing with the real challenges and trying to work with the ICC – as the George W Bush administration began to do and Barack Obama did on larger scale – this administration is attempting to weaken the ICC and punish anyone who works with it. This is par for the course for the Trump team, which also pulled the US out of the UN human rights council instead of trying to improve it.

In the end, this is less about the ICC and more about the of nature of American power. The Trump administration believes that the US is not only special but also has no responsibilities abroad.

But it is possible to believe in the US being special while also behaving like a responsible power. As former US secretary of state Madeleine Albright said: “We are exceptional. We just can’t ask that exceptions be made for us.”

Part of what makes the US unique is that, unlike any other great power in the history of the world, it continues to try to use its power for both the good of the US as well as the world, even though it may not always succeed in doing so. Because America is exceptional, it is even more important that the US follow international law, work to improve and enforce it, and act like a truly exceptional global leader.