The scandal undoing the ICC

Summary

Podcast Summary: Today, Explained – "The scandal undoing the ICC"

Date: July 29, 2026
Host: Harry Davies (Vox, Investigative Journalist for The Guardian)
Featured Guests:

• Sarah (Accuser, former ICC employee)
• Marco Rubio (US Secretary of State)
• Beth Van Schaack (Former US Ambassador-at-Large for Global Criminal Justice)
• Zoran Mamdani (NYC Mayor)

---

Overview

This episode unpacks the seismic scandal rocking the International Criminal Court (ICC): the removal of Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan after allegations of sexual misconduct. While such a scandal would normally eclipse all other concerns, today it interlocks with immense geopolitical tension—especially the ICC’s contentious arrest warrants for Israeli leadership, backlash from the US government (now led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio), and wavering global support for the court. The discussion dives deep into the allegations, the geopolitics threatening the ICC’s legitimacy, and the practical and moral fallout for international law.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Karim Khan Scandal: Origins and Fallout

[02:01 – 04:09]

• In April 2024, a female staffer (Sarah) disclosed to colleagues her emotional distress after experiencing sexual advances and escalating abuse from Karim Khan, the ICC’s chief prosecutor.
• Sarah’s initial intent was not to spark an investigation or damage the court, but simply for the conduct to stop.
  Quote, Sarah (Accuser):
  “My intention was never to have an investigation or for this to have gone as far as it did. I just wanted it to stop.” (04:09)
• Allegations eventually became public, triggering an internal and later a UN investigation, leading to Khan’s suspension and eventual removal.

2. The Intricate Politics: ICC, Israel, the US, and Alleged Weaponization

[04:37 – 11:27]

• Months before the allegations surfaced, Khan sought arrest warrants against both Hamas leaders and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

• This decision set off bitter resistance from Israel and the US. Some speculated Sarah’s allegations were part of a smear campaign or retaliation, but others emphasize the need to treat the accusations on their own merits. Quote, Investigative journalist:
  “Two things can be true here. The Israelis and the Israeli government can be seeking to exert a great deal of pressure upon the court with the US in a very aggressive fashion. It can also be true that these allegations are serious, credible, and warrant a great deal of scrutiny.” (10:44)

• While intelligence agencies have spied on the ICC, interviewees clarify the difference between real misconduct claims and the subsequent exploitation of those claims by geopolitical actors.

3. The Challenge of Replacing Khan

[11:27 – 13:00]

• ICC’s prosecutor is elected by member states. For now, two deputy prosecutors (also previously elected) are running the office. There is anticipation and debate about whether one of the deputies runs, or if an outsider will be chosen for a needed “fresh start.” Quote, Investigative journalist:
  “That person… will need to be able to be a custodian at the prosecutor’s office and manage it through this exceptionally challenging time. Probably the most challenging moment the court has ever encountered.” (12:54)

4. US-ICC Relationship: A Rocky History

[17:17 – 22:32]

• Ambassador Beth Van Schaack charts US policy from hesitancy and outright hostility (Bush, Trump eras), through sporadic cooperation (late Bush, Obama years) to the latest aggressive antagonism under Secretary Rubio.
• US primary worry: ICC might arrest US citizens (especially military) for actions in other countries.
• Despite bipartisan support post-Ukraine invasion, US policy veers hard against ICC as warrants are issued for Israel’s leaders. Quote, Beth Van Schaack:
  “There have been peaks and valleys in the relationship between the ICC and the United States. So we're in a valley, a frankly pretty deep valley right now… with this new campaign that Secretary Rubio announced.” (18:51)

5. The Rubio Factor: US Pushback Against the ICC

[22:32 – 25:42]

• Rubio’s language is combative, describing the ICC as an attack on US sovereignty and promising to counter “the threat from the court.” Quote, Marco Rubio:
  “If they believe they can deprive us of our sovereignty, we will teach them the full meaning of American resolve.” (22:58)
• US cannot dissolve the ICC but can (and is) inflicting damage via sanctions, travel bans, and pressuring allies to withdraw. Eight judges and several NGOs have already been sanctioned.

6. The “Netanyahu Question”: Could He Be Arrested in the US?

[25:42 – 27:38]

• With NYC Mayor Zoran Mamdani on record desiring Netanyahu’s arrest if he enters New York, the episode parses realpolitik versus legal possibility. Quote, Zoran Mamdani:
  “Benjamin Netanyahu is not welcome in New York City, nor is any other war criminal at large.” (26:13)
• Reality: Near zero chance of arrest due to federal law, UN Headquarters immunities, and diplomacy. Quote, Beth Van Schaack:
  “If I were his lawyer, I would say there's no chance you're going to get arrested. But honestly, it could be a miserable visit given all of the strong support for accountability in this matter in the United States.” (27:15)

7. Collateral Damage: Who Gets Hurt?

[27:38 – 29:13]

• Global trust is eroding: The ICC appears disorganized, the US appears hostile to international justice, and the underlying cause—accountability for grave crimes—may suffer most. Quote, Beth Van Schaack:
  “Unfortunately, I think everyone comes out not looking great here… The court needs to put in place measures to be able to receive those complaints... But then the United States looks terrible as well, launching a campaign… against an international organization whose mandate it is to deliver justice for the worst crimes known to humankind.” (28:10)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On motivations behind the scandal:
  “She didn't want this to jeopardize the work of the court, and she didn't initially comply or work with an internal investigation.” — Investigative Journalist (04:09)

• On Israeli/US pressure and distinction from underlying allegations:
  “Are the underlying allegations fabricated by the Israelis? … There is a distinction to be made here between the allegations themselves ... and the way in which Israel ... have sought to instrumentalize and weaponize, exploit this situation.” — Investigative Journalist (09:13–10:17)

• On ICC’s power to survive US hostility:
  “The United States alone cannot dismantle this court. Now. It can injure the court, and it has already done so.” — Beth Van Schaack (24:15)

• On international justice and US self-interest:
  “Instead of instead attacking an institution that's trying to do exactly that and trying to hold leaders to account… I would like to see the United States stand with survivors and not attack institutions that are designed to deliver justice for survivors.” — Beth Van Schaack (28:54)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 00:02 – 04:09: The emergence of sexual misconduct allegations against Karim Khan
• 04:37 – 07:13: Internal ICC fallout, denials, and initial reactions
• 09:01 – 11:27: The geopolitics of the allegations and the split between genuine misconduct vs. weaponization
• 11:27 – 13:00: The process and stakes for replacing Khan
• 17:17 – 22:32: US-ICC relations over four administrations, with context from Beth Van Schaack
• 22:32 – 25:42: The Rubio doctrine and US methods to “injure” the court
• 25:42 – 27:38: The legalities and theatrics around Netanyahu’s ICC warrant and possible US arrest
• 27:38 – 29:13: Who ultimately loses as the ICC's crisis deepens?

---

Conclusion: What Does This All Mean?

Dark days loom for the ICC, as internal scandal merges with diplomatic warfare. The original mission of international criminal justice—accountability for the world’s worst crimes—faces existential questions about legitimacy, authority, and political will. All sides—from brave whistleblowers to embattled institutions and global power-brokers—come out bruised, leaving the future of justice at the international level deeply uncertain.

Transcript

[Harry Davies]

The chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court was removed from his job last week. The elected official prosecutor Karim Khan, committed

[Marco Rubio]

serious misconduct and a serious breach of duty under Article 461 of the Rome Statute.

[Harry Davies]

A UN watchdog spent about two years investigating allegations that Khan sexually abused a female co worker. Now, in normal times, a scandal such as this would be the ICC's biggest problem. But it's 2026. And so Marco Rubio and we lunatics

[Marco Rubio]

and crazies involved in the ICC and Zoran Mamdani.

[Zoran Mamdani]

Benjamin Netanyahu is a war criminal.

[Harry Davies]

And Benjamin Netanyahu.

[Podcast Host/Announcer]

I'm going to New York.

[Harry Davies]

And the nation of Chad and the nation of Venezuela are also threatening the court's legitimacy. Coming up on Today Explained from Vox. Dark days at the icc.

[Zoran Mamdani]

Support for this show today comes from Anthropic, the team behind Claude. Claude is the AI for minds that don't stop at good enough. It's the collaborator that actually understands your entire workflow and thinks with you whether you're debugging code at midnight or strategizing your next business move. Claude extends your thinking to tackle the problems that matter with deep research. Claude's research capabilities go way deeper than basic web search, comprehensive research, reliable analysis with proper citations, turning hours of research into minutes for problems worth solving. You can get started with Claude at Claude AI todayexplained. That's Claude AI todayexplained.

[Podcast Narrator]

This is Today Explained.

[Harry Davies]

Harry Davis is an investigative correspondent for the Guardian. He's been covering the ICC and those who seek to influence it for about three years now. He was reporting last week when the ICC's chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, was removed from his position, which is no small deal. Where does this start?

[Investigative Journalist]

We had to go back two years, to the very end of April 2024. And behind the scenes at the ICC, a woman, a young woman in her 30s who worked directly for Kareem Khan, confided in some colleagues about what she was experiencing.

[Sarah (Accuser)]

When I made that disclosure, I was exhausted. I was extremely emotional. I was not in a good place. And it was after the colleague I shared an office with had repeatedly said, are you okay? Something's wrong, something's up. You haven't been. You've been behaving strangely. And it came up.

[Investigative Journalist]

And she alleged that Khan had been abusing her over an extended period of time.

[Sarah (Accuser)]

I have no other way to describe it but an escalation of attempts. And so that escalation was happening in this environment where you are trying desperately to almost emotionally regulate Mr. Khan. And as I would describe it, the pawing, the physical nature of it. But it didn't start that way because it was kind of like encroachments on the boundaries slowly, not just physically, but emotionally as well.

[Investigative Journalist]

These colleagues then went forward to report this internally and then also inform Khan that they had been made aware of these allegations. And at that point, the complainant, the woman didn't want this to blow up. She didn't want this to jeopardize the work of the court, and she didn't initially comply or work with an internal investigation.

[Sarah (Accuser)]

Again, my intention was never to have an investigation or for this to have gone as far as it did. I just wanted it to stop. That's it.

[Investigative Journalist]

But eventually, the fact that she had made these allegations emerged into the public domain, and then, well, sort of all hell broke loose.

[Marco Rubio]

Then

[Harry Davies]

what happens after all hell breaks loose?

[Investigative Journalist]

Well, there seems to have been an effort by a mysterious third party at that stage to get information about these allegations into the public domain. And at that point, the ICC is under a great deal of pressure and strain and scrutiny. Just months earlier, Kareem Khan had made a momentous decision to seek arrest warrants for not only three senior Hamas figures who were involved in planning the attack on Southern Israel on October 7. He also sought arrest warrants against Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, and his then Defence Minister, Yoav Gallant. This meant the allegations were very much viewed against that backdrop, and there were immediate concerns that these allegations were somehow part of a smear campaign against him.

[Harry Davies]

What do we know about the woman who made the allegations? How did she end up here?

[Investigative Journalist]

Sarah is a lawyer. She is originally from Malaysia. She is Muslim. She's a mother. She had worked at the court for several years before she started working for Kareem Khan.

[Sarah (Accuser)]

I was maybe the oldest intern. I started off as an intern at the court, and I did essentially anything that was asked of me in the immediate office, and that could be drafting speeches, and I would be there to assist in any way possible.

[Investigative Journalist]

She was in a job that meant she worked very closely with Khan as his direct special assistant.

[Sarah (Accuser)]

It would be preparing his briefing notes. I would be one of four people in his immediate team. And so essentially, anything that Mr. Khan needed, we would be executing.

[Investigative Journalist]

And she suddenly found herself in this situation, which just having spoken to people around her, close to her, caused her a great deal of psychological distress. And she found herself at the center of this, what became a very geopolitically contested, fraught drama. There were several moments during the course of this past two years where her allegations were referred to by senior Israeli politicians, including Benjamin Netanyahu, and that this was a distressing moment for Sarah. From what I understand, did Karim Khan

[Harry Davies]

ever admit to having done anything here? What does he say happened?

[Investigative Journalist]

So Khan has consistently denied any wrongdoing.

[Marco Rubio]

I, in October, asked for an investigation. I denied the allegations. I met the UN and in the very first opening comments to the investigators, I completely denied engaging any harassment, abuse, authority, inappropriate behaviour. Looking at the evidence, looking at the report, there was no misconduct or breach of authority by me, certainly no reprisals or abuse, harassment, as has been alleged.

[Investigative Journalist]

His lawyers have also argued that the process that has resulted in his ousting was procedurally unfair. They've also sought to characterize the process as a politically motivated effort to get rid of him, as a sort of form of retaliation, or in response to his decision to seek arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

[Harry Davies]

Okay, so his lawyers say this was politically motivated because he issued an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu. What exactly are these folks alleging? And are they alleging that Sarah, the woman who filed the complaint, are they alleging that she's part of it? Like, what's the story they're telling?

[Investigative Journalist]

There have been efforts over the past two years to suggest that she may be part of a plot to smear him.

[Harry Davies]

According to this report, even some inside

[Investigative Journalist]

the ICC found the timing of the allegations suspicious.

[Beth Van Schaack]

You know, what's your response to that?

[Harry Davies]

Well, first of all, are you a Mossad agent?

[Marco Rubio]

No.

[Sarah (Accuser)]

And if I would be one, I would say I was terrible at it.

[Investigative Journalist]

There's a very nuanced picture here. So the ICC is under, without doubt is under huge pressure from the US but also Israel. I've reported at great length on the way in which the Israeli intelligence services have spied upon and sought to intimidate the icc. And that has gone on for many years. But are the allegations themselves by Sarah and by a second woman who also came forward to the Guardian last year, who had a similar set of allegations against Khan about his conduct towards her early in his career? Are the underlying allegations fabricated by the Israelis? And there is a distinction to be brought to be made here between the allegations themselves and the underlying allegations and claims that these women have made with the way in which Israel and pro Israeli actors, which would include the current Trump administration, have sought to instrumentalize and weaponize, exploit this situation because they don't like the fact that Khan made this huge decision to seek arrest warrants for sitting Israeli prime minister. And that distinction is Something that I think some people have struggled to make. But there are two things can be true here. The Israelis and the Israeli government can be seeking to exert a great deal of pressure upon the court with the US in a very aggressive fashion. It can also be true that these allegations are serious, credible, and warrant a great deal of scrutiny. And they have now been subject to a great deal of scrutiny through the course of this UN watchdog. And they've gone through this disciplinary process. And this disciplinary process, it is fair to say, has been somewhat ad hoc and drawn out, convoluted, and has raised a great deal of concerns about the way in which states may not be using it in order to remove Khan because they also don't like the decisions he made, prosecutorial decisions he made in relation to Israel and Palestine.

[Harry Davies]

Let me ask you this. So Karim Khan has to be replaced. Now, what's that process going to be like?

[Investigative Journalist]

There has to be a new election. The ICC prosecutor is elected by all member states. So there will be a process. It's unclear exactly when that will be, but for now, the prosecutor's office, which is a division of the court, has about 400 staff. It's like the kind of engine room of the court that is investigating and working on these cases, that is currently being led by Khan's two deputies, deputy prosecutors. They are also elected officials. They have been running the court, this organ of the court, the prosecutor's office, for more than a year now, because Khan had previously stepped away and then he was then suspended. So it's in their hands for now. But there will need to be an election. One of those two candidates may run. They may decide that they want the top job. But some of the people I've spoken to in the court also feel that now might be the time for a fresh start with a new face and to bring in someone, someone new. That person who, whoever it is, will need to be able to be a custodian at the prosecutor's office and manage it through this exceptionally challenging time. Probably the most challenging moment the court has ever encountered.

[Harry Davies]

Harry Davies is an investigative correspondent with the Guardian. That tape of Sarah, the woman who accused Karim Khan, is from an excellent interview that Christiane Amanpour conducted for cnn. When we come back, Marco Rubio on the warpath and the ICC in his crosshairs.

[Zoran Mamdani]

Support for the show today comes from Anthropic. In case you were wondering who's behind Claude, that's Anthropic. Claude is the AI for minds that don't stop at good enough is that you? It's the collaborator that actually understands your entire workflow and thinks with you. Have you been looking for that? Whether you're debugging code at midnight or strategizing your next business move, Claude extends your thinking to tackle the problems that matter with dangerous, deep research. Claude's research capabilities go way deeper than basic web search comprehensive, reliable analysis with proper citations turning hours of research into minutes. We love a proper citation, don't we? Plus, you can connect Claude to your professional tools like GitHub, Jira, HubSpot Notion, Google Workspace and watch it become your command center with context from all your work. That means Claude has context from your calendar, emails, and all of your Go to tools for problems worth solving. Get started with Claudlaud AI todayexplained. That's Claude AI todayexplained.

[Podcast Host/Announcer]

Support for this show comes from im8. Ever feel like you're cycling between whatever the hot supplement is but never sticking with one to see real results? Imaite is the way to simplify your supplement routine once and for all. Imate's Daily Ultimate Essentials can replace 16 separate supplements all in one drink for just $2.61 a day. That's 90 ingredients that can work across nine major organ systems. Imate was co founded by David Beckham and built by leading doctors and researchers. Which is to say, Imate was designed by the world's best 95% of people who tried it over 12 weeks felt more energy. And that's from a clinical trial conducted by the San Francisco Research institute. Go to imaid.comexplained right now or click the link in the description to use Code Explain for a free welcome kit, five travel sackets plus 10% off your order. That's code [e-mail] explained. Code [e-mail] Explained these statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

[Harry Davies]

Support for Today Explained comes from npr. Is social media bad for your mental health? Are you spending too much on other people's weddings? What is heteropessimism and are you a heteropessimist? If the culture is asking it, so is NPR's it's been a Minute podcast. It's Been a Minute stands for your right to be curious. One big question at a time. Four days a week, the great Britney Luce breaks down the ideas, the trends, the conversations shaping the culture. She goes beyond obvious takes. She talks to creators, critics, cultural figures who help you see things differently. You will hear dialogues with both up and comers and with icons and it's from npr. I used to work at npr. Did you know that About Me I have appeared on Britney's show on It's Been a Minute. She's very smart. It's very good. She covers everything. Basically, this is what we love about Britney Loose. She has a wide variety of interests. It's Been a Minute knows that cultural trends don't happen by accident. It's not just what's trending, it's why it's trending and what that says about us. Brittany and company Dig into the latest memes to unpack how they got into your feed and why they're stealing our attention. Conversations you want to have, ones you will bring up later. Follow NPR's it's been a Minute podcast and indulge your cultural curiosity.

[Sarah (Accuser)]

Foreign.

[Harry Davies]

Is back, this time with former Ambassador Beth Van Scock. She advised the State Department on global criminal justice, which makes her something of an expert on the icc.

[Beth Van Schaack]

Well, it's an institution that I have studied for many years. I led an NGO delegation in the 1990s that participated in the drafting of the court. And then I've studied, studied it ever since. I've also been in government. My most recent role was as ambassador at large for global criminal justice. And so my office was essentially the liaison between the United States and a whole host of international justice institutions, but including the International Criminal Court.

[Harry Davies]

If the International Criminal Court is charged with dealing with people who have allegedly done very bad things and then trying them and determining if they have done very bad things, why is the United States not a member?

[Beth Van Schaack]

The United States signed the treaty in the waning days of the Clinton administration, but never submitted it to ratification for the Senate. And one of the concerns is that the final treaty allows for jurisdiction over individuals who may commit crimes on the territory of states parties. And the United States has always been concerned about that principle because we have troop commitments. And there's a very strong belief that US Service members should enjoy all of the protections of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Now, supporters of the court have always said, listen, the United States and its personnel are vulnerable regardless of whether you join, right? If U.S. personnel are committing crimes on the territory of states parties, which we saw in Afghanistan. So Afghanistan is a state party member. The US Personnel, most notably members of the Central Intelligence Agency, committed what President Obama called torture in Afghanistan. And so those that conduct was potentially vulnerable to be brought before the icc. The response is then, of course, then do those cases domestically, and there'll be no occasion for the International Criminal Court to consider those matters. There have been peaks and valleys in the relationship between the ICC and the United States. So we're in a valley, a frankly pretty deep valley right now with this new campaign that Secretary Rubio announced a week or so ago. But back in the Bush administration, there was also very acute concern, and it stemmed from this Afghanistan investigation. And so then the Bush administration and also Congress both put in place measures that they thought would be protective of UF service members. So that was one kind of more valley. Now, what's interesting is in the second term of the Bush administration, many of these measures were dismantled because the Bush administration realized that the court was doing important work in some areas where it also cared about justice, and in particular, Darfur.

[Marco Rubio]

And I promise this to the people of Darfur. The United States will not avert our eyes from a crisis that challenges the conscience of the world.

[Beth Van Schaack]

Then the Obama administration announced a reset in its relationship with the court. And that's where I entered the picture. I was deputy in the office that I later led as ambassador in the next Democratic administration. So at that point, the Obama administration directed across the various executive agencies to look for ways to support the court, where the work that it was doing was consistent with US Policy in those particular situation countries.

[Expert Commentator]

It was created, and the idea of international justice was created for those extraordinary circumstances in which. You see a leader operating in ways that is so contrary to international norms and basic beliefs that we have about the dignity of people, that the international community sees the need to speak and to render judgment.

[Beth Van Schaack]

Then we had the first Trump administration, which reversed course almost immediately, eventually opposed sanctions on senior figures, including the prosecutor herself. It was the previous prosecutor and one of her key aides.

[Marco Rubio]

As far as America is concerned, the ICC has no jurisdiction, no legitimacy, and no authority.

[Beth Van Schaack]

Then we get to the Biden Harris administration. They pulled down those sanctions and again launched a reset of the relationship. And at that point, there were a number of situations where the court was working, including following the brutal war of aggression by Russia against Ukraine. And here we saw a remarkable rise of bipartisan support for the work of the court. You had senior Republican figures in Congress supporting the court. The late Lindsey Graham led a resolution that was supporting justice in Ukraine. There is no rule of law in Russia to hold Putin accountable. So this international tribunal is the right way to go. Secretary Rubio, then Senator Rubio, joined that resolution. There was new legislation passed that made it easier for the United States to support the work of the Court. And then of course, with the second Trump administration, we have reversed course again, and in particular with Rubio's announcement.

[Marco Rubio]

But as we speak, the ICC and its friends are waging a war against our country, not with bullets or missiles, but with statutes, compacts, and the force of so called international law.

[Harry Davies]

Well, let's talk about their reversal. So Secretary of State Marco Rubio is at one point on board with the icc. And then recently he more or less vows to dismantle it.

[Marco Rubio]

If they believe they can deprive us of our sovereignty, we will teach them the full meaning of American resolve.

[Harry Davies]

What happened here?

[Beth Van Schaack]

Well, it's not clear what the precipitating event is. To be honest. There is no existential threat at present. Obviously, there's always the concern that this is some kind of a distraction because matters are not going well in Iran and with respect to the economy. And so this is something to sort of pull eyeballs away from those matters onto something that he can sort of look tough in terms of being America first, et cetera, which ultimately results in being America alone rather than America first, necessarily. So it's not clear what the precipitating event is. Is this just kind of red meat for anti multilateralism or is there something that is not made public that is happening?

[Harry Davies]

Secretary Rubio's words were pretty strong. He talked about dismantling the threat from the court, not dismantling the court itself dismantling the threat. And there is also some nuance there. Is there anything actually that Marco Rubio or anyone else in the United States at the highest level could do to the International Criminal Court to like, put an end to it?

[Beth Van Schaack]

The International Criminal Court exists. It's part of a larger system of the rules based order that we've been trying to build since World War II. Almost all of our friends and allies are members of this court and they care deeply about its success. They are committed to seeing a system of international criminal justice. So no is the answer. The United States alone cannot dismantle this court. Now. It can injure the court, and it has already done so. I mean, we should note that there's already eight judges, including judges who hail from some of our closest allies, France, for example, who have been subjected to brutal sanctions. They can't use credit cards that pass through New York. They can't make reservations online because of financial sanctions. They can't travel to the United States because of travel bans, et cetera. The chief prosecutor and two of his two deputies have been sanctioned non governmental organizations that are involved in Human rights in Palestine have been sanctioned and a UN figure has been sanctioned. Now those measures are already in place. What his most recent campaign seems to announce is some kind of a diplomatic move to try and convince states to leave the court or to cease their cooperation with the court. And we have seen in several recent days a couple of states announcing that they were withdrawing. These are mostly states within Africa, but also Venezuela, which is subject to investigation by the prosecutor's office. The United States can certainly injure the court, but there's no way that we could dismantle the court.

[Harry Davies]

I want to ask you about an interesting development here, Beth. Most Americans, I think, don't spend a lot of time thinking about the International Criminal Court, but they may know, because lately it has gotten a lot of attention, that the court has issued a warrant, an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu, and that New York City's mayor, Zoran Mamdani, has said he would like to see Netanyahu arrested if he comes to New York. Mamdani has said he does not have that power. He cannot order the NYPD to do it, but he would like for it to happen.

[Zoran Mamdani]

And I want to be equally clear. Benjamin Netanyahu is not welcome in New York City, nor is any other war criminal at large.

[Harry Davies]

What are the chances, I think people are genuinely wondering that Benjamin Netanyahu comes to the United States and is arrested?

[Beth Van Schaack]

So pretty close to zero, if not actually zero. This is a matter of federal law and international law. And the headquarters agreement between the United States and the United nations, which placed the headquarters of the UN in New York, basically gives certain privileges and immunities to individuals who are coming to New York to attend official functions. New Yorkers, as of course your listeners will know, are a feisty bunch. So when it gets, when word is out that Benjamin Netanyahu is in New York, can you imagine the protests that would happen? Can you imagine the embarrassment that he might experience when he's supposed to be giving his remarks at the General assembly, high level week, where all the heads of states convene to deal with transnational issues and his motorcade is ensnared in protests protected by the First Amendment, you know, calling for his arrest for, you know, various international crimes? If I were his lawyer, I would say there's no chance you're going to get arrested. But honestly, it could be a miserable visit given all of the strong support for accountability in this matter in the United States.

[Harry Davies]

All right, so we have an institution, the icc, that for the most part, I think, for most people, flies under the radar. And at this moment, it is in the center of several really big news cycles. This is a lot of drama for a body that for a long time seems to have avoided a ton of very public drama. So who gets hurt in all of this? Is it, Is it the court? Is it the US and its reputation? Where do you think this, this leads?

[Beth Van Schaack]

Unfortunately, I think everyone comes out not looking great here. The court needs to put in place measures to be able to receive those complaints by witnesses, whistleblowers, victims themselves, process them quickly, but also fairly to all parties involved. But then the United States looks terrible as well, launching a campaign like this against an international organization whose mandate it is to deliver justice for the worst crimes known to humankind. And instead of instead attacking an institution that's trying to do exactly that and trying to hold leaders to account. And so I would like to see the court succeed. I would like to see it put in place measures to enable it to work efficiently and also treat all parties before it fairly. I would like to see the United States stand with survivors and not attack institutions that are designed to deliver justice for survivors.

[Harry Davies]

That's former ambassador beth van scock. Ariana espudu produced today's show. The rest of the team, amina el saadi, gabriel donatov, david tadashore, patrick boyd, short king. That's me. It's today explained.

[Podcast Narrator]

Running a business shouldn't feel like surviving a software group project. One app for accounting, another for inventory, another for sales, and somehow none of them talk to each other. That's where Odoo comes in. An all in one business management software that brings every part of your business together, from sales and accounting to inventory and marketing, all in one powerful platform. No messy integrations, no bouncing between tabs, and best of all, no spreadsheets. Stop managing software and start managing your business with one unified system. Try for free [e-mail] Vox that's O-O-O.com Vox.