The ICC issued a warrant for war crimes in Ukraine. It came right for Putin.


Russian President Vladimir Putin delivers speech during the congress of Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (RSSP) on March 16, 2023, in Moscow, Russia. Putin met top Russian businessmen and billionaires to talk about economic problems resulting from the sanctions brought about by the military invasion of Ukraine. | Contributor/Getty Images

It alleges he is responsible for the unlawful transfer of Ukrainian children to Russian territory.

The International Criminal Court has issued a warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin for war crimes, a hugely significant and symbolic step, even if he never faces trial.

The ICC specifically alleges that Putin is responsible for the “unlawful deportation” and transfer of Ukrainian children from Ukraine to the Russian Federation. The court also issued a warrant for Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova, Russia’s commissioner for children’s rights, for similar war crimes.

These are the first ICC warrants for alleged war crimes in Ukraine — and the court went directly for Putin. “Going straight to the top is a bold move for the ICC, but one that makes sense in this situation,” Rebecca Hamilton, associate professor at American University Washington College of Law, wrote in an email. “There are so many different actors working on accountability for war crimes in Ukraine, but the ICC is the only one with the capacity to go after President Putin.”

This is not the first time the ICC has issued a warrant to a sitting head of state, but it is the first for a head of state of a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. “In that sense, it is much more politically consequential than the other indictments that the ICC issued for heads of state,” said David Bosco, an international law expert and associate professor at the University of Indiana Bloomington.

At the same time, there is very little chance Putin will actually face trial. The accused can’t stand trial in absentia, and Russia is not a party to the ICC (neither is the US; Ukraine isn’t either, but it has previously accepted the court’s ad hoc jurisdiction.) “The decisions of the International Criminal Court have no meaning for our country, including from a legal point of view,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova posted on Telegram.

But this warrant will likely make it even more difficult for Putin to travel abroad, especially to other countries that do recognize the court’s jurisdiction, deepening his international isolation.

More than that, it carries serious symbolism, especially given the wider allegations of war crimes and atrocities against Russia throughout the Ukraine war. The decision to go after Putin was a major move by the court — rather than, say, going after midlevel generals or something of the like. It is tying the allegations of war crimes in Ukraine directly to the man who launched the invasion. It is also a signal to Ukraine that the court is pursuing evidence of war crimes, with urgency and a real commitment.

Why did Putin get charged with war crimes?

Human rights groups and other investigators have documented evidence of Russia’s forcible and illegal adoption and relocation of children from Ukraine to Russia, or Russian-occupied territory. Many groups, including the UN-backed inquiry, have said it likely amounts to a war crime. The Ukraine government has claimed that around 16,000 Ukrainian kids have been illegally relocated by Russia.

Russia does not exactly deny its removal of children from Ukraine. Instead, it advertises it, deploying it as a propaganda tool to promote the war in Ukraine and frame the adoptions as a patriotic and just act.

This likely guided the ICC’s decision to pursue Putin for these particular crimes; this is happening out in the open, and Putin is closely tied to the policy. There is evidence that Russia and Russian troops may have committed other war crimes in Ukraine, from kidnappings to massacres to indiscriminate attacks on civilian populations. But, as experts said, it can be a bit more complicated to track that back directly to Putin — or will at least take more evidence-gathering and investigation.

“The evidence collection on the crime of the unlawful deportation is strong, and the crime is recognizably horrific, so it makes sense as a place to start,” Hamilton said. “In addition, the court signaled that by making this public, they hope to deter further deportations.”

Experts said this was unlikely to be the end of potential war crimes charges for Russian officials, and even for Putin himself. But by coming for Putin first, the court is sending a message that other Russian officials, from the top, down, may also be held accountable for potential war crimes in Ukraine.

Related articles

FEMA pressures staff to rat out colleagues who have criticized Trump anonymously: report



A number of Federal Emergency Management Agency staff that openly criticized President Donald Trump are under intense investigation from FEMA leadership, and under threats of termination should they refuse to reveal the names of their colleagues who criticized Trump anonymously, Bloomberg reported Thursday.

Nearly 200 FEMA employees signed onto a letter in August pushing back against the Trump administration’s cuts to FEMA, warning that the cuts could jeopardize the agency’s ability to adequately respond to disasters.

More than a dozen FEMA employees – all of whom signed onto the letter – were soon placed on leave. Now, remaining staff that had signed onto the letter using their name are being investigated by agency leadership, being threatened to reveal the names of their colleagues who signed the letter anonymously, according to insiders who spoke with Bloomberg and documents reviewed by the outlet.

“The interviews with FEMA workers have been carried out by the agency's division that investigates employee misconduct, and those interviewed have been told they risk being fired for failure to cooperate,” Bloomberg writes in its report. “The employees have been instructed not to bring counsel, according to people familiar with the process.”

The revelation that FEMA staff under investigation were being instructed not to bring legal counsel was revealed, in part, by Colette Delawalla, the founder of the nonprofit organization Stand Up for Science, the same organization that helped FEMA staff publish its letter of dissent.

“They are not really given an option not to comply,” Delawalla told Bloomberg. “They don’t have guidance while they’re in there.”

Trump has previously said he wanted to phase out FEMA and “bring it down to the state level,” with the agency struggling to respond to emergencies such as the deadly Texas flood in July following new Trump administration policies that led to funding lapses for the agency.

A previous batch of FEMA employees – 140 of them – were placed on leave back in July for signing onto a different letter of dissent, which itself followed a number of FEMA employees being forcibly reassigned to work for Immigrations Customs and Enforcement amid Trump’s mass deportation push.

Critics have characterized the FEMA purges as a blatant violation of the Whistleblower Protection Act, which provides clear protections for government employees from retaliation for disclosing information that is a “specific danger to public health or safety.”

Governor Hochul and Labor Leaders Announce Maximum Weekly Benefit Increase for Unemployed Workers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwL-Di-DTK4 As Washington Republicans wage reckless trade wars...

Trump STEPS into WORLD OF HELL as HE IS CAUGHT ON TAPE

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on Donald...