

I am with you that the more countries take the international tribunal seriously, the better. Like I said its a great detriment that the country the idea was instigited in didn’t subject itself to its rule. If they had it would be much more effective and beneficial.
However dismissing the institution because of that and giving up on the idea alltogether is being defeatist. I think it very necessary to keep ethics and jurisprudence a part of the discussion of international affairs. For instance Israel may reject any jusrisdiction of the ICC. However the IJC delcaring the war in Gaza as genocide an holding Israel and Hamas responsible will mean that their leaders can be arrested in all 124 member states of the Rome Statute.
Even though they might not be aprehended and some countries have said as much, it still means that the prime minster of Israel is handicapped in his comings and goings and will think twice before traveling to such a country.
It does not mean that every bad guy gets punished. Most will get away with it. But I wouldn’t say there isn’t any power about being the first jewish prime minister standing trial for genocide. In the end ethics are a part of human understanding of history.
‘Weird’ is what they called Elons Nazi salute too. It’s not the correct term I feel.