Trump slaps sanctions on Canadian ICC judge in clash over US and Israel investigations
The Trump administration has escalated its conflict with the International Criminal Court (ICC) by imposing sanctions on four officials, including a Canadian judge, due to their involvement in investigations targeting US personnel and Israeli leaders. These measures, which freeze assets and restrict financial transactions, are a response to the ICC's probes into alleged war crimes in Afghanistan and Gaza.
Reuters
Kimberly Prost, a veteran Canadian jurist serving on the ICC, was sanctioned by Washington over rulings tied to US and Israeli war crimes investigations
The Trump administration escalated its campaign against the International Criminal Court (ICC) on Wednesday(August 20), imposing sanctions on four officials, including a Canadian judge, over their roles in investigations targeting US personnel and Israeli leaders.
The State Department said the measures freeze assets held in US jurisdictions and restrict financial transactions, the latest step under an executive order signed by President Donald Trump in February that authorizes penalties against ICC officials deemed to threaten American sovereignty.
Among the sanctioned officials is Kimberly Prost, a Canadian national who has served on the ICC's Trial Division since 2018. According to the State Department, she was targeted for her ruling authorizing the court's investigation into alleged war crimes committed by US personnel in Afghanistan.Prost, a veteran jurist, previously worked as the United Nations Security Council's first Ombudsperson for its Al Qaida Sanctions Committee and spent nearly two decades with Canada's Department of Justice. Also sanctioned were French judge Nicolas Yann Guillou, who was part of the panel that issued arrest warrants last year for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and Deputy Prosecutors Nazhat Shameem Khan of Fiji and Mame Mandiaye Niang of Senegal, who upheld the Gaza-related warrants.
The decision reflects the administration's intensifying pushback against the ICC. Neither the US nor Israel is a member of the tribunal, and Washington argues the court has no authority over its nationals.'The United States has been clear and steadfast in our opposition to the ICC's politicization, abuse of power, disregard for our national sovereignty, and illegitimate judicial overreach,' the State Department said in a statement.The administration has framed the sanctions as necessary to protect American service members and diplomats, as well as Israel, from what it considers politically motivated prosecutions.
The move mirrors the Trump administration's first-term clash with the court, when sanctions were imposed on then-prosecutor Fatou Bensouda and another senior official during probes into Afghanistan and Israel. Those measures were lifted by President Joe Biden in 2021, though his administration maintained opposition to ICC jurisdiction over non-member states.But Trump, who returned to office this year, has revived the hardline approach. The latest designations follow earlier sanctions in June against four other ICC judges.The ICC condemned the decision, calling it a direct assault on judicial independence. Israel welcomed the US decision. Netanyahu, facing the court's arrest warrant, praised the sanctions.Meanwhile, rights groups warned that the measures could hinder global accountability efforts. The administration's aggressive stance is also facing domestic challenges. A federal judge in Washington blocked parts of Trump's executive order on constitutional grounds, ruling that restrictions on providing services to ICC officials infringed on free speech protections.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
13 minutes ago
- First Post
How China is scaling up Russian oil orders as Trump turns the screws on India
China is increasing its purchases of Russian crude, which was once destined for India, as US President Donald Trump's tariff offensive forces New Delhi to scale back its imports. With Beijing securing at least 15 cargoes for October and November delivery, the shift shows how much Russia is dependent on Asian buyers Fuga Bluemarine crude oil tanker lies at anchor near the terminal Kozmino in Nakhodka Bay near the port city of Nakhodka, Russia, December 4, 2022. File Image/Reuters China is expanding its role as a leading buyer of Russian crude oil, taking advantage of shifting market conditions triggered by United States President Donald Trump's tariff actions. With New Delhi facing mounting costs from Washington's trade restrictions over its imports of Russian oil, Beijing has moved quickly to secure additional shipments that traditionally flowed to India. India emerged as one of the most important destinations for Russian oil in the wake of the Ukraine conflict. After Moscow's invasion in 2022, European and other Western markets drastically cut their purchases, forcing Russia to reroute crude toward Asia at discounted rates. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This paved the way for India and China to become the two largest buyers of Russian supplies. How China has ordered more Russian oil As India has scaled back, China's refiners have stepped in to buy additional Russian supplies. By mid-August, state-owned oil companies and major private refiners had secured at least 15 cargoes of Russian crude for October and November delivery. Each shipment ranged between 700,000 and 1 million barrels, representing a substantial addition to China's intake. Most of these cargoes will originate from Russia's Arctic and Black Sea ports, routes that normally supply India rather than China because of logistical proximity. Muyu Xu, senior crude oil analyst at Kpler, explained that the decision reflected an opportunity created by lower prices. Russian grades were trading at least $3 per barrel below comparable West Asian supplies. 'As for whether China will continue buying, I personally believe that right now is still a very good opportunity, because over in India, Trump is still pressing hard on them,' she said. Xu added that if Chinese refiners moved quickly, they could lock in further shipments before the US considered retaliatory action. 'Taking advantage of this opportunity while prices are low, I think more refineries will probably consider buying more, within a week or two,' she noted. Richard Jones, a Singapore-based analyst at Energy Aspects, said that while China was unlikely to replace all of India's lost demand, the additional purchases would nonetheless make a difference in the short term. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'We do not expect China to absorb all of the additional Russian volumes, as Urals is not a baseload grade for Chinese majors,' he told Reuters, referring to the type of Russian crude involved. How Trump targeted India over Russian oil By 2023, Russian crude accounted for more than one-third of India's oil imports, representing 36 per cent of the total market. United Nations trade data shows that in 2024, India imported $53 billion worth of petroleum and crude oils from Russia. In volume terms, this amounted to roughly 88 million tonnes during that year. However, in July, Trump announced that countries continuing to buy Russian crude would face the risk of secondary tariffs. According to the White House, the move was designed to increase economic pressure on Moscow and reduce its capacity to finance the war in Ukraine. This month the US imposed a further 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods shipped to the United States, on top of an existing 25 per cent levy, raising the total to 50 per cent. The Trump administration explicitly connected this penalty to India's imports of Russian oil and gas. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD As a result, Indian refiners have begun scaling back their purchases. Reuters citing analysts reported that New Delhi has reduced its Russian crude imports by between 600,000 and 700,000 barrels per day, a significant contraction. State-owned refineries in particular paused new orders as discounts narrowed, while private refiners also cut back amid fears of US reprisals. Senior figures in the Trump administration have been forthright about their position. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC that India had moved from negligible levels of Russian oil imports before the war — less than 1 per cent of its supply — to sourcing around 42 percent from Russia. 'This is what I would call the Indian arbitrage – buying cheap Russian oil, reselling it as product,' he said, adding that Indian refiners had generated '$16 billion in excess profits – some of the richest families in India.' White House trade adviser Peter Navarro also argued that New Delhi's purchases were indirectly financing Russia's war effort. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD His colleague, deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, echoed the sentiment earlier in the month, insisting that India's continued reliance on Russian crude was 'not acceptable.' How the scale of China's oil imports has increased China has long been the world's largest oil importer, and Russian crude plays a growing role in its supply mix. In 2024, Chinese customs data showed that the country imported 109 million tonnes of Russian crude, representing close to 20 per cent of its total energy intake. United Nations statistics indicate that Russia's shipments to China amounted to $62.6 billion in value that year. Much of Beijing's Russian crude intake traditionally comes in the form of ESPO shipments from the Far East port of Kozmino, which offers a relatively short shipping route. Urals and Varandey grades, by contrast, usually head to India. A container ship sails along Nakhodka Bay near the oil terminal in the port city of Nakhodka, Russia, August 12, 2022. File Image/Reuters By August, Kpler data showed that China's year-to-date Urals imports averaged only about 50,000 barrels per day. The sudden booking of 15 cargoes for October and November therefore marks a sharp increase from previous patterns. Overall, China currently takes in around 1.2 million barrels per day of Russian seaborne crude. India, by comparison, had been purchasing about 1.7 million barrels per day until the recent cutbacks. Analysts agree that China cannot entirely make up for India's reduction, leaving Russia facing the risk of a significant drop in revenues if Indian demand does not recover. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Xu underlined this point, saying, 'If India keeps holding off on buying, that's going to be a real problem for Russia – China just can't take on all of India's volume by itself.' Why Washington's approach to Beijing differs from New Delhi Although Beijing has increased its purchases of Russian crude, Trump has so far avoided imposing punitive measures on China similar to those directed at India. On August 15, he told Fox News that retaliatory action was not an immediate priority. 'Well, because of what happened today, I think I don't have to think about that. Now, I may have to think about it in two weeks or three weeks or something, but we don't have to think about that right now,' he said. The comments came shortly after Trump met Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska, where discussions over a ceasefire in Ukraine broke down. Observers believe Trump may be holding off on secondary sanctions against Beijing to preserve space for broader trade negotiations. One of the key issues under discussion is access to rare earth minerals, a set of 17 elements critical to industries ranging from clean energy and electronics to military hardware. China dominates global mining and processing of these minerals, giving it considerable leverage. The US, heavily reliant on imports for manufacturing, has sought to ensure continued access. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A major escalation by the US with China would risk disrupting supply chains and raising costs just as US retailers stock up on inventories ahead of the end-of-year holiday season. Earlier this month, Trump eased restrictions on semiconductor exports, permitting Nvidia to sell advanced chips to China again, though subject to a 15 per cent levy on sales to the country. Bessent told CNBC that China had imported around 13 percent of its crude from Russia before the war, a figure that has since risen to 16 percent. 'So China has a diversified input of their oil,' he said. He argued that Beijing had not engaged in the same form of arbitrage that India had undertaken. How Russia is dependent on Asian markets Moscow has become heavily reliant on Asian customers in the wake of Western restrictions. Since 1979, when the US first imposed sanctions on Iran after the Tehran hostage crisis, oil markets have frequently been shaped by geopolitical disputes. For Russia, the fallout from the Ukraine conflict has forced a near-total reorientation of exports. European embargoes and G7 price caps have shut Russia out of its most lucrative markets. In their place, India and China have provided vital outlets. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Together, the two countries absorbed the bulk of Moscow's seaborne exports in 2023 and 2024, helping stabilise its revenues even at discounted prices. China has made clear that it does not recognise US restrictions on global energy trade. Responding to questions by the Financial Times about its imports of sanctioned oil, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Beijing said the country has 'consistently opposed illegal unilateral sanctions' that lack approval from the United Nations Security Council. For the immediate future, China's refiners are taking advantage of discounted Russian barrels that India has relinquished. With inputs from agencies
Time of India
13 minutes ago
- Time of India
US $250 visa fee may cost economy $29 bn in lost tourism spend
You Might Also Like: Could Trump's Big Beautiful Bill drive away World Cup tourists from the US? Congress and the US tourism industry are at odds over the newly approved $250 'visa integrity fee.' While the Congressional Budget Office ( CBO ) projects it could generate about $2.7 billion annually, industry officials warn it will deter international visitors and harm the broader CBO's estimate is based only on direct fee collections from roughly 11 million annual applicants. But Tourism Economics , a division of Oxford Economics, found the fee could discourage 5.4% of visitors, translating to nearly one million fewer trips each year. That would cut visitor spending, tax revenue, and jobs in the tourism sector. A CBO spokesperson told Forbes, 'By longstanding tradition, the Congressional Budget Office does not incorporate macroeconomic feedback effects into its traditional cost estimates.'Industry representatives argue that lawmakers overlooked the impact on key markets such as India and Brazil. 'Congress made the mistake of assuming that this worldwide visa integrity fee would not have a big impact on visitors from countries like India or Brazil,' Erik Hansen, senior vice president of government relations at the US Travel Association, told Forbes. He noted India is one of the fastest-growing inbound markets, with Indian tourists spending $13.3 billion in the US in 2024. 'Applying a $250 fee to a country where travel is growing is mindboggling. It will absolutely deter travel—that's what our research has found,' Hansen refund provision attached to the fee is also drawing scrutiny. Under the Big Beautiful Bill, the State Department 'may reimburse' the fee after the visa expires, but most visitor visas are valid for 10 years. 'The idea that you're going to give the government money and then wait around 10 years and remember to ask for it back, even if you followed the rules, is just absolutely crazy,' Hansen said. The CBO itself acknowledged that few applicants would claim refunds, and the State Department would need years to create a processing fee comes as international tourism to the US faces broader headwinds. A June report from the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) projected the US will be the only major market to see a decline in international visitor spending in 2025, with losses estimated at $29 billion. WTTC President Julia Simpson said, 'While other nations are rolling out the welcome mat, the US government is putting up the 'closed' sign.'Compounding the challenge, Congress cut funding for Brand USA—the country's marketing agency—from $100 million to $20 million. Hansen called the decision 'another error,' stressing that the program is central to shaping international perceptions of the US as a travel destination.
The Print
13 minutes ago
- The Print
Why the thriving Indian diaspora in the US is not an asset anymore
China is a manufacturing colossus and has a monopoly on rare earths; Russia has thousands of ICBMs; India has very few chips to play poker with. No wonder academics like Ashley Tellis and politicians like Peter Navarro are quite openly telling us that we should accept vassal status. In any case, we speak good English, even in our present condition. We need to do more than that. We should become like Europeans and reconcile ourselves to abject servility in front of 'Daddy'. That a former Prime Minister from the Netherlands, the country of Rembrandt and Spinoza, who is now the NATO chief, feels comfortable being a comic courtier in the American throne room tells you something about the decline of the Dutch and the utter helplessness of Europe. Now, just consider some other world leaders. We have to assume that Xi Jinping does not know much English. He invariably speaks in Mandarin. Vladimir Putin probably has some working knowledge of English. But he always speaks in Russian. We know that Narendra Modi is pretty fluent in English. But he chooses not to speak in English. This may constitute proof that, among others, here are three countries that choose not to accept the mantle of being vassals. And therein may be the problem. The White House meeting with European leaders involved a brief press appearance by all of them. It was interesting to watch that all the European leaders spoke in English, and pretty reasonable English at that. Being an old man, I am in a position to reflect on the past. I just cannot imagine a Charles De Gaulle or even a Konrad Adenauer opting to speak in English before the international press. I remember that De Gaulle went to Montreal and stood up for a Free Quebec, but he did that in French. In some of my favourite podcasts—The Duran, Glenn Diesen—it has now become almost casually acceptable to refer to European countries as American vassal states. Europe got this way by skimping on defence expenditure, by becoming a continent of museums, cafes, parks and concert halls, by encouraging citizens to work fewer hours, by encouraging generous early retirements and above all by committing itself to a cosmopolitanism that quite simply denies that citizens and residents have duties. Fortunately, at least as of now, China, Russia and India have not succumbed to these fashions. Also read: Trump govt considering ban on Muslim Brotherhood—Is the West's romance with Islamism over? Lessons for Indian diaspora Our media tends to over-personalise matters by focusing excessively on Trump. The issues are bigger and of a long-term nature. The Americans supported and encouraged China's economic rise, hoping that over time China would become wound up in American soft power. That did not happen. They are therefore not going to make, what in their minds would be a second mistake: Support emphatically, the rise of an India, especially one which refuses to accept a servile status. A credentialed academic like Tellis argues that it is in India's interests to accept the American embrace unconditionally. India is unlikely to get the break which China got with a soft entry into the WTO. Navarro goes one step further. He suggests that India drop diversification and indigenisation of its weapons systems and stick to expensive American weapons with no technology transfer and consequent complete reliance on the whims of American suppliers who can at any time delay spares with arguments about supply chain problems. We have noticed these in recent times with jet engines. The thriving Indian diaspora in the US has been an asset till now. Things may change. The excessive publicity about Indian success stories and their high income and wealth levels has begun to breed envy and resentment in non-elite sections of the American populace. There might be a campaign against H1B visas and even a gradual expulsion of persons stuck in a limbo with pending green cards and pending citizenship. It is important to remember that, unlike in our country, where social change is slow, even glacial, such changes take place in America with lightning speed. Besides, one small change in the law can have very significant impacts. Lyndon Johnson's one change in US immigration policies in 1965 led to the creation of the present Indian American efflorescence. A similar small change in any regulation can have deleterious effects this time around. What choices do we have? We are a poor country, looking forward to a better future. We cannot imitate Russia or China. We need to navigate carefully in choppy waters. I believe that we are largely in agreement that we cannot opt for the European model of subservience and vassalage. In these circumstances, we need to take a fresh look at our PR strategy on handling multiple constituencies within the United States. If we focus exclusively on the political and bureaucratic class, we risk making the mistake that Israel has made in recent times and losing the wider PR battle. The first thing we need to do is to stop crowing about successful Indian CEOs. We must strive to stay under the radar and project a benign image at local levels and stay steady, but non-confrontational in Washington. All of this is going to be very tricky and difficult. But let us have no doubts. The ground beneath our feet is shifting. And for the time being, the best strategy might be to stop crowing about us becoming a large economy (we are nowhere there in per capita terms anyway) or becoming a big power. We can lie low till our time comes. We can learn from our northern neighbour. Jaithirth 'Jerry' Rao is a retired entrepreneur who lives in Lonavala. He has published three books: 'Notes from an Indian Conservative', 'The Indian Conservative', and 'Economist Gandhi'. Views are personal. (Edited by Theres Sudeep)
