On 17 March 2025, the US Department of Justice formally notified European officials of its decision to withdraw from the International Centre for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine (ICPA). The move marks a sharp policy shift under the Trump administration, which is rolling back its predecessor’s efforts to hold Russia’s leadership accountable for its war against Ukraine.
The ICPA was set up in 2023 under the umbrella of Eurojust, the EU’s criminal justice agency, with a clear mission: to collect evidence of Russia’s crime of aggression and build the legal case for a future special tribunal. The US had been the only non-European country involved, sending a senior Justice Department prosecutor to The Hague to work with investigators from Ukraine, the Baltic states, and Romania. Its departure signals not just a change in Washington’s priorities but a retreat from a key international effort to deliver justice.
The Trump administration’s decision to pull out of the ICPA is more than just a policy shift—it signals a softer US stance on Russia and threatens to undermine efforts to establish a special tribunal. The US had played a key role within the ICPA, with one of its lead prosecutors helping to ramp up legal pressure on Moscow. Now, its withdrawal strips the organisation of crucial expertise and material support, potentially stalling evidence collection, weakening coordination between international investigators, and jeopardising the tribunal’s future. Worse still, Washington’s retreat could prompt other nations to rethink their involvement, further eroding the chances of holding Russia’s leadership to account.
Moral responsibility: why silence is an action
Turning a blind eye to a crime isn’t just inaction—it’s tacit approval. Justice is meant to be more than an abstract ideal; it’s a system that holds wrongdoers to account. If someone witnesses an act of violence on the street and does nothing—not even calling the police—we call it indifference. But when an official refuses to investigate a crime, it’s not just apathy; it’s complicity.
States, too, carry moral responsibility. When justice is compromised in one instance, it sets a dangerous precedent that weakens the very foundation of the rule of law. The US decision to withdraw from the ICPA is not merely a shift in political priorities—it is a blow to the global legal order. Until recently, the world’s largest democracy stood firm in its commitment to holding Russia accountable for its crime of aggression. Now, its willingness to turn a blind eye sends a chilling message to authoritarian regimes everywhere: international law is less about justice and more about political convenience.
This approach undermines trust in international justice systems and heightens the risk of impunity for future aggressors. If accountability for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine can be sidestepped today, similar scenarios could unfold anywhere tomorrow. The impunity of one criminal becomes an invitation for others to act with impunity.
Impunity as a global threat
History teaches us a harsh lesson: crimes left unpunished tend to repeat themselves. In the 20th century, the world paid a catastrophic price for this failure—twice. The policy of appeasing an aggressor before World War II didn’t prevent tragedy; it only emboldened Hitler. Similarly, the lack of a strong response to Russia’s 2008 invasion of Georgia gave the Kremlin a dangerous sense of impunity, which ultimately paved the way for the war in Ukraine.
Putin’s actions today are not just about Ukraine—they are a warning to the world. His message is clear: violence can be legitimised if the right “geopolitical compromises” are found in time.
Principles vs actions
The US has long called for international support in the fight for justice. After 9/11, it successfully rallied the world to combat terrorism—a stark reminder that security principles cannot be applied selectively. Those who hesitate to hold an aggressor accountable today may find themselves its victim tomorrow.
Political pragmatism often leads countries to seek compromises, but compromising with evil is an illusion. Accountability for the war in Ukraine is not just a Ukrainian issue; it’s a test of whether the world is truly willing to uphold its own principles.
Accountability cannot be avoided
Refusing to prosecute an aggressor doesn’t make the problem go away. On the contrary, it resurfaces in another form, in a new conflict, on a different continent. Impunity is a virus with no borders.
And anyone who believes that avoiding justice is a means of maintaining neutrality is mistaken. To know about a crime and do nothing is not simply to ignore it—it’s to become complicit in its continuation. Silence becomes complicity, and in the end, it will turn against those who choose to remain quiet.
