US ICC Sanctions Pose a Test for Japan

The US sanctions on International Criminal Court (ICC) President Akane Tomoko have put Japan in a difficult position, testing its commitment to the rule of law and its relationship with the US.

When the sanctions were announced, Tokyo's response was swift and carefully calibrated. Foreign Ministry Press Secretary Kitamura Toshihiro called the move "very unfortunate," reaffirming Japan's consistent support for the ICC and the rule of law. Prime Minister Takaichi Sanae also commented publicly, saying that she considered the sanctions "very unfortunate" and would continue communicating with the US and other relevant countries.

However, the restraint was noticeable, as Japan has spent nearly two decades championing the ICC. Japan became a state party to the Rome Statute in 2007 and has since been one of the ICC's strongest supporters. The sanctions target not only Akane but also Senegalese ICC lawyer Abdoulaye Seye, as part of a broader Trump administration campaign against the court.

The US argues that the ICC has overstepped its authority by pursuing nationals of countries that have not accepted its jurisdiction, including the US and Israel. In response, the ICC has strongly rejected the sanctions, calling them "a flagrant attack" on the independence of an impartial judicial institution.

European leaders have rallied behind Akane, with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa saying they "stand firmly" with the ICC president and officials carrying out its mission. The Netherlands, which hosts the ICC, has also rejected the sanctions and reaffirmed its support for the court and Akane.

Pressure is building at home for Japan to take a stronger stance. A cross-party parliamentary group has condemned the sanctions in the "strongest possible terms" and urged the government to lodge a clear protest and demand their withdrawal.

Tamaki Yuichiro, leader of the Democratic Party for the People, has made an important distinction: Japan should defend Akane not simply because she is Japanese, but because of the rule of law she represents.

The controversy exposes a wider tension in Japanese diplomacy, where Tokyo's commitment to the rule of law collides with the policies of its only treaty ally. This is not the first time the Takaichi government has confronted that question, as it did earlier this year when the US and Israel attacked Iran.

There are understandable reasons for Japan's caution, as the Japan-US alliance remains the foundation of Japan's security strategy amid growing challenges from China, North Korea, and Russia. However, keeping quiet takes a toll on Japan's credibility, and Tokyo has spent years demanding that Beijing and Moscow respect international law and condemning attempts to change the status quo by force or coercion.

Tokyo doesn't have to choose between the Japan-US alliance and the ICC. A mature alliance should be able to absorb disagreement, and defending judicial independence does not require Japan to endorse every decision made by the ICC.

Tokyo can, however, make clear that judges and court officials must be able to carry out their duties without political coercion. It can ask Washington to withdraw the sanctions, and work with the Netherlands, the EU, and other ICC states parties to ensure that Akane can continue performing her duties.

### Japan's Commitment to the Rule of Law

For decades, Japan has said that it stands for a rules-based international order. The sanctions on the ICC president may now force Tokyo to show what that commitment means when the pressure comes not from Beijing or Moscow, but from Washington.

### The Choice Before Tokyo

The choice before Tokyo is therefore larger than whether to protect Akane or defer to Trump. Japan can choose to stand by its commitment to the rule of law and defend the independence of the ICC, or it can prioritize its relationship with the US and risk undermining its credibility as a champion of international justice.

### A Middle Power's Interest

As a middle power rather than a nuclear-armed great power, Japan has a profound interest in an international system in which rules constrain power. If major powers can decide when international institutions deserve respect and when they can be pressured for politically inconvenient decisions, Japan ultimately has much to lose.

### A Mature Alliance

A mature alliance should be able to absorb disagreement, and defending judicial independence does not require Japan to endorse every decision made by the ICC. Tokyo can, however, make clear that judges and court officials must be able to carry out their duties without political coercion.

### The Way Forward

The way forward for Tokyo is to take a clear and principled stance on the sanctions. It can ask Washington to withdraw the sanctions, and work with the Netherlands, the EU, and other ICC states parties to ensure that Akane can continue performing her duties. This would be an uncomfortable step for Tokyo, but it would also be a necessary one to maintain its credibility as a champion of international justice.