U.S. Sanctions as State Threat Against International Courts of Justice
August 6, 2025—The Netherlands is a significant player in Europe with close ties to the United States. It’s a founding member of both the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance and the European Union. So when the Dutch government conducts a threat assessment and names the United States, an ally, as a peril to its interests, it’s significant.
Let’s step back. In July, the Netherlands published its annual “The State Actors Threat Assessment.” The areas of Dutch concerns are many: Russia’s military operations and threat to NATO, the geopolitical rise of China and BRICS, Iran’s ballistic missiles, and the changing world order.
What’s interesting is that this year, the United States is included among the top threats. So too is Israel. It should be noted that an overall theme this year is a shifting global dynamic from American hegemony to a multipolar world. The geopolitical challenge for states is to maintain economic and political influence.
International Order Shifts from Law to Lawless Power
The U.S. role is still significant. However, states are taking cautious note as the United States shifts toward a more power-centric stand in international relations. Rather than upholding the rule of law and international institutions, the U.S. government is seen as undermining them. For example, the United States, along with Russia, uses its veto power in the UN Security Council to block resolutions that would otherwise align with UN principles. That’s comes at a cost to states like the Netherlands, as noted in the threat assessment:
“The United States also takes a different position regarding the international legal order than in recent decades. As a relatively small player with an open economy and limited military resources, the Netherlands actually benefits from an international order that functions based on law rather than power.”
Attack on International Courts
Shortly after taking office in his second term, President Donald Trump signed an executive order imposing sanctions on the International Criminal Court.
“The United States unequivocally opposes and expects our allies to oppose any ICC actions against the United States, Israel, or any other ally of the United States that has not consented to ICC jurisdiction.”
The sanctions came in response to ICC arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Former Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant along with key leaders of Hamas for war crimes since October 7, 2023.
Executive Order 14203 refers to a “national emergency” associated with ICC investigations and subjects ICC-related property in the United States to sanctions. Notably, the order not only “unequivocally opposed” the court but also “expects our allies to oppose” it.
In July, a federal court found the executive order likely violates the First Amendment. Judge Nancy Torresen of the Federal District Court in Maine shielded two human rights activists, Matthew Smith and Akila Radhakrishnan, from penalties with investigations in Bangladesh, Myanmar and Afghanistan.
To date, U.S. sanctions impact four ICC judges, the ICC prosecutor Karim Khan, and Francesca Albanese, a special rapporteur for the United Nations.
The Hague and International Order
The Hague in the Netherlands houses both the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court. According to the Dutch government, both are targets of state actors.
“International institutions and partnerships can be targets for state actors because of their function, role, and the interests that countries have in them.”
The Dutch report says both the United States and Israel publicly threatened the court. The U.S. sanctions, in particular, “could damage or even halt the court’s operations, partly because the court may have limited or no access to financial services.” Israel has previously been accused of launching a decades-long war against the ICC.
Moreover, the possibility of more sanctions is likely. That has the impact of undermining international law.
“The U.S. sanctions could have far-reaching consequences for the Court’s functioning in the long term, and thus for the prosecution and trial of individuals suspected of committing international crimes, such as genocide, crimes against humanity, or war crimes. The courts are also an attractive target for espionage and subversive influence for a large number of countries, because their nationals can be tried there.”
In turn, that poses a threat to the international order and every state that relies on it for security.
“These types of activities can undermine the continuity and independence of international legal institutions; they therefore pose a direct threat to the international legal order. Moreover, they impact the Netherlands, due to the cooperative relationship and because the host country is responsible for the security of the courts. When the Netherlands provides information to such institutions and this information reaches state actors through clandestine channels, it also affects national security.”
