Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

“Slay This Monster”: the United States and Opposition to the Rome Statute on the International Criminal Court

  • Published:
Human Rights Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • American Society of International Law (2009) U.S. Policy toward the International Criminal Court: Furthering Positive Engagement. American Society of International Law, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Amnesty International (1999) ‘International Criminal Court: Governments Should Mark Rome Statute’s Anniversary by Prompt Signature and Ratification IOR 40/14/99, July 16.

  • Andreas P, Nadelmann EA (2006) Policing the Globe: Criminalization and Crime Control in International Relations. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker D (2008) The Bush Administration’s Campaign against the International Criminal Court. In: Campbell DG (ed) A Bird in the Bush: Failed Domestic Policies of the George W. Bush Administration. Algora, New York, 131–174

  • Bolton JR (1998) No, No, No to International Criminal Court. Human Events 54 (32): August 21

  • Brown, B (1999) U.S. Objections to the Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Brief Response. Journal of International Law and Politics. (31): 854–91

  • Budge I, McKay D, (eds) (1990) Developing Democracy: Comparative Research in Honour of J.F.P. Blondel. Sage Publications, London

  • Carpenter TG (1998) Betrayal of Principle: Liberals and the War Crime Tribunals. Cato Institute Commentary (August 24). http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/betrayal-principle-liberals-war-crimes-tribunals. Accessed July 13, 2014

  • Casey AL, Rivkin DB Jr (1999) The International Criminal Court vs. the American People. The Heritage Foundation Backgrounder Executive Summary, 1249 (February 5). http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/1999/02/the-international-criminal-court-vs-the-american-people. Accessed July 15, 2014

  • Checkel JT (1997) International Norms and Domestic Politics: Bridging the Rationalist-Constructivist Divide. European Journal of International Relations 3 (4): 473–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Checkel JT (1998) The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory. World Politics 50 (2): 324–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clinton WJ (1995) Remarks at the Signing Ceremony for the Balkan Peace Agreement in Paris. Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents (December 14): 2184-6

  • Clinton WJ (1997) Nominations submitted to the Senate. Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents (May 22): 774

  • Clinton WJ (2000) Statement on the Rome Treaty on the International Criminal Court Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents (December 31): 4

  • Dempsey GT (1998) Reasonable Doubt: The Case against the Proposed International Criminal Court. Cato Institute Policy Analysis 311 (July).

  • Fabbrini S (2007) Compound Democracies: Why the United States and Europe are Becoming Similar. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Feinstein L, Lindberg T (2009) Means to an End: U.S. Interest in the International Criminal Court. Brookings Institution Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnemore M (1996) National Interest in International Society. Cornell University Press, Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnemore M, Sikkink K (1998) International Norms Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization. 52 (4) Autumn:887–917

  • Finnemore M, Sikkink K (2001) Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics. Annual Review of Political Science 4 (2001): 391–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher L (2004) Presidential War Power. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence

    Google Scholar 

  • Franck TM (1990) The Power of Legitimacy Among Nations. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein J, Kahler M, Keohane RO, Slaughter AM (2000) Introduction: Legalization and World Politics. International Organization 54 (3): 385–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordenker L, Weiss TG (1995) Pluralising Global Governance: Analytical Approaches and Dimensions. Third World Quarterly 16 (3): 357–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham TW (1994) Public Opinion and U.S. Foreign Policy Decision-making. In: Deese D. The New Politics of American Foreign Policy. St.Martin’s Press, New York, 190–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Grieco JM (1988) Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism. International Organization. 42 (3) Summer:485–507

  • Helms J (1998) Helms Declares U.N. Criminal Court “Dead-on-Arrival.” Congressional Press Releases, March 26

  • Hill C (2003) The Changing Politics of Foreign Policy. Palgrave, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Human Rights Watch (1998) Stop Threatening the International Criminal Court, U.S. Officials Told. Human Rights Watch, New York, July 23

    Google Scholar 

  • Human Rights Watch (1998) World Report. Human Rights Watch, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Jepperson RL, Wendt A, Katzenstein PJ (1996) Norms, Identity, and Culture in National Security. In: Katzenstein P (ed) The Culture of National Security. Columbia University Press, New York, 33–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Jervis R (1999) Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the Debate. International Security. 24 (1) Summer:42–63

  • Jones CO (1994) The Presidency in a Separated System. Brookings Institution, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahler M (2000) Conclusion: The Causes and Consequences of Legalization. International Organization 54 (3):661-683

  • Kahn PW (2000) Speaking Law to Power: Popular Sovereignty, Human Rights, and the New International Order. Chicago Journal of International Law. 1 (1) Spring

  • Katzenstein P (1996) The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman N (1990) Human Rights Treaties and the Senate: A History of Opposition. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill

    Google Scholar 

  • Keck ME, Sikkink K (1998) Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Cornell University Press, Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

  • Keith Hall C (2000) The First Five Sessions of the UN Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court. The American Journal of International Law 94 (4) October: 773–89

  • Kowert P, Legro J (1996) Norms, Identity, and their Limits: A Theoretical Reprise. In Katzenstein PJ (ed) The Culture of National Security. Columbia University Press, New York, 451–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreb C, Von Helzendorff L (2010) The Kampala Compromise on the Crime of Aggression. Journal of International Criminal Justice (8): 1179–1217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leigh M (2001) The United States and the Statute of Rome. The American Journal of International Law 95 (1) January: 124–31

  • Lietzau WK (2001) International Criminal Law after Rome: Concerns from a U.S. Military Perspective. Law and Contemporary Problems 64 (1): 119–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luck EC (1999) Mixed Messages: America and International Organizations, 1919–1999. Brookings Institution Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyndsay JM (2004) From Deference to Activism and Back Again: Congress and the Politics of American Foreign Policy. In Wittkopf ER, McCormick JM (eds.) The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy: Insights and Evidence. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Lanham, 183–195

    Google Scholar 

  • March JG, Olsen JP (1998) The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders. International Organization 52 (4), 943–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mastanduno M (2005) The United States Political System and International Leadership: A Decidedly Inferior Form of Government? In: Ikenberry JG (ed) American Foreign Policy: Theoretical Essays. Longman, New York, 238–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Meckled-Garcia S, Basak C (2006) The Legalization of Human Rights: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Human Rights and Human Rights Law. Routledge, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meron T (1998) The Court We Want. The Washington Post

    Google Scholar 

  • Nadelmann EA (1990) Global Prohibition Regimes: The Evolution of Norms in International Society. International Organization 44 (4) Autumn: 479–526.

  • Neustadt RE (1980) Presidential Power: The Politics of Leadership from FDR to Carter, Macmillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pace W (1998) The Day Peace Won. The International Criminal Court Monitor 9 (August)

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson J (2006) In Defence of Inelegance: IR Theory and Transatlantic Practice. International Relations 20 (1) March: 5–25

  • Putnam RD (1988) Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games. International Organization 42 (3): 427–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ralph J (2007) Defending the Society of States: Why America Opposes the International Criminal Court and its Vision of World Society. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rathbun BC (2004) Partisan Interventions: European Party Politics and Peace Enforcement in the Balkans. Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeker PT (2000) U.S. State Department Press Briefing, June 13

  • Rhode DW (1994) Partisan Leadership and Congressional Assertiveness in Foreign and Defense Policy. In: Deese DA (ed) The New Politics of American Foreign Policy. Saint Martin’s Press, New York, 76–101

    Google Scholar 

  • Risse T (1999) To Euro or Not to Euro? The EMU and Identity Politics in the European Union. European Journal of International Relations 5 (2): 147–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risse T, Ropp SC, Sikkink K (1999) The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Risse-Kappen T (1991) Public Opinion, Domestic Structure, and Foreign Policy in Liberal Democracies. World Politics 43 4: 479–512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roper Center at University of Connecticut (1999) Program on International Policy Attitudes, October 1999

  • Rosenau JN (1967) Domestic Sources of Foreign Policy, The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin JP (1998a) U.S. Department of State Press Statement, April 2, 1998

  • Rubin JP (1998b) U.S State Department Dispatch. Library of Congress (June 23)

  • Schabas WA (2004) United States Hostility to the International Criminal Court: It's All About the Security Council. European Journal of International Law 15 (4):701–720

  • Schaeffer BD (1998) The International Criminal Court: Threatening U.S. Sovereignty and Security. The Heritage Foundation Executive Memorandum 537

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheffer DJ (1997) The Future of International Criminal Justice. Address at the Peace Palace, The Hague, Netherlands, September 19

  • Scheffer DJ (1997) U.S. Policy and the Proposed Permanent International Criminal Court. Address at the Carter Center, Atlanta GA (November 13)

  • Scheffer DJ (1998) Seeking Accountability for War Crimes: Past, Present, and Future. Address before the Commonwealth Club, San Francisco, CA, May 13

  • Scheffer DJ (1998) Remarks before the Sixth Committee of the 53rd U.N. General Assembly. New York City, October 21

  • Scheffer DJ (1999) The United States and the International Criminal Court. The American Journal of International Law 93 (1) January: 12–22

  • Scheffer DJ (2000) Statement before the Sixth Committee of the U.N. General Assembly. New York City, October 18

  • Scheffer DJ (2001–2) Staying the Course with the International Criminal Court. Cornell International Law Journal 35: 47–100

  • Scheffer DJ (2012) All the Missing Souls: A Personal History of the War Crimes Tribunals. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlesinger AM Jr (2004) War and the American Presidency. W.W. Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt E (1998) Pentagon Battles Plans for International War Crimes Tribunals. New York Times, April 14

  • Sewall S, Kaysen C, Scharf MP (2000) The United States and the International Criminal Court: An Overview. In: Sewall SB, Kaysen C (eds) The United States and the International Criminal Court. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, 1–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart P, Forman S (eds) (2002) Multilateralism and U.S. Foreign Policy: Ambivalent Engagement. Lynne Rienner, Boulder and London

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone Sweet A, Sandholtz W, Fligstein N (2001) The Institutionalization of Europe. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2001.

  • University of Maryland (1999) A Study of U.S. Public Attitudes, October 1999

  • U.N. General Assembly (1998) Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. U.N. General Assembly, Rome: A/CONF.183/9

  • U.S Congress. House. (1998–2000) Congressional Records: www.thomas.loc.gov via Library of Congress

  • U.S. Congress. Senate. (1993–2000) Congressional Records: www.thomas.loc.gov via Library of Congress

  • U.S. Delegation (1998a) Statement of the United States Delegation on Elements of Offenses. U.N. Conference on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court. New York: United Nations (Official Records): April 3

  • U.S. Delegation (1998b) Statement to the Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court (March 23): http://www.iccnow.org/documents/USEstablishmentofICC.pdf

  • U.S. Department of State (1998a) Daily Press Briefing, July 20

  • U.S. Department of State (1998b) Daily Press Briefing, July 15

  • Weiss TG (2011) RtoP Alive and Well After Libya. Ethics and International Affairs (12 August): 1–6

  • Weller M (2002) Undoing the Global Constitution: U.N. Security Council Action on the International Criminal Court. International Affairs 78 (4 [October]): 693–712

  • Wendt A, (1992) Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics. International Organization 46 (02):391

  • Wiener A (2007) Contested Meanings of Norms: A Research Framework. Comparative European Politics 5: 1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidad Pontificia Comillas (ICAI-ICADE), Calle Alberto Aguilera, 23, 28015, Madrid, Spain

    Andrea Betti

Authors
  1. Andrea Betti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Betti.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Betti, A. “Slay This Monster”: the United States and Opposition to the Rome Statute on the International Criminal Court. Hum Rights Rev 17, 417–438 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-016-0427-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-016-0427-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation