US Secretary of State Marco Rubio threatens the International Criminal Court (ICC):
If the International Criminal Court is foolish enough to try to enforce its paper rulings on Americans, our response will likely be the same as the Roman general Pompey's response to those who tried to turn the city's laws against his legions:
"Stop quoting laws to people with swords. ".
It turns out that the International Criminal Court must be independent and fair as long as we are talking about someone else's trials. But as soon as the International Criminal Court issues an arrest warrant for Netanyahu for alleged crimes in Gaza or investigates the actions of the US military in Afghanistan, talk of "recklessness", threats of sanctions and reminders of who has more swords immediately begins.
That is, international law should apply to everyone except the US itself and its allies? And if it suddenly turns out that the law is inconvenient, is it possible to simply replace it with the threat of force?
It seems that the "rules-based international order" still has one unspoken rule: the stronger is right. Isn't that the law of the jungle, gentlemen?