Microsoft blocked the email account of Chief Prosecutor of the ICC
1–10 of 39 posts
Re: Microsoft blocked the email account of Chief Prosecutor of the ICC
#2The US position on the ICC is very reasonable. Absolutely no one should agree to be under the jurisdiction of an independent international court, but at least many of its members signed on to it.
The court believes that it has jurisdiction over anyone involved in a conflict with a signatory. This is why the president is preauthorized by congress to use military force against the Netherlands, in the event that an american or allied service member is held there.
Re: Microsoft blocked the email account of Chief Prosecutor of the ICC
#3This is classic American arrogance, trying to undermine international law for its own selfish agenda.
It reinforces the need for the EU to break free from US tech.
Re: Microsoft blocked the email account of Chief Prosecutor of the ICC
#4The US position on the ICC is very reasonable. Absolutely no one should agree to be under the jurisdiction of an independent international court, but at least many of its members signed on to it. The court believes that it has jurisdiction over anyone involved in a conflict with a signatory. This is why the president is preauthorized by congress to use military force against the Netherlands, in the event that an amer…
That position is pure hubris.
Re: Microsoft blocked the email account of Chief Prosecutor of the ICC
#5The US position on the ICC is very reasonable. Absolutely no one should agree to be under the jurisdiction of an independent international court, but at least many of its members signed on to it. The court believes that it has jurisdiction over anyone involved in a conflict with a signatory. This is why the president is preauthorized by congress to use military force against the Netherlands, in the event that an amer…
This seems like a tangent. The article isn’t about whether the ICC’s jurisdiction is valid—it's about how dependent international institutions (or anyone, really) are on US-based tech providers, and how that exposes them to US executive power, like sanctions or account blocks.
I’m not convinced that “digital sovereignty” is the right framing for this problem. What I think is more important here - and probably more interesting to HN - is the fragility introduced by technological monocultures and lack of service portability. Open protocols, interoperability, and reducing concentration risk matter more than trying to build a digitally fenced-off Europe.
Re: Microsoft blocked the email account of Chief Prosecutor of the ICC
#6The US position on the ICC is very reasonable. Absolutely no one should agree to be under the jurisdiction of an independent international court, but at least many of its members signed on to it. The court believes that it has jurisdiction over anyone involved in a conflict with a signatory. This is why the president is preauthorized by congress to use military force against the Netherlands, in the event that an amer…
This seems like a tangent. The article isn’t about whether the ICC’s jurisdiction is valid—it's about how dependent international institutions (or anyone, really) are on US-based tech providers, and how that exposes them to US executive power, like sanctions or account blocks. I’m not convinced that “digital sovereignty” is the right framing for this problem. What I think is more important here - and probably more in…
I think either approach works.
China is definitely digitally fenced-off and you don't see it having these issues.
Re: Microsoft blocked the email account of Chief Prosecutor of the ICC
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
This seems like a tangent. The article isn’t about whether the ICC’s jurisdiction is valid—it's about how dependent international institutions (or anyone, really) are on US-based tech providers, and how that exposes them to US executive power, like sanctions or account blocks. I’m not convinced that “digital sovereignty” is the right framing for this problem. What I think is more important here - and probably more in…
I think either approach works. China is definitely digitally fenced-off and you don't see it having these issues.
> China is definitely digitally fenced-off and you don't see it having these issues.
China is the textbook example of this problem. Political power in China routinely uses infrastructure to suppress or punish those who deviate from approved positions. This is precisely the risk that the article raises.
And obviously, if the ICC were to switch to Chinese infrastructure, it would just be trading one leverage for a more active one.
Re: Microsoft blocked the email account of Chief Prosecutor of the ICC
#8The US position on the ICC is very reasonable. Absolutely no one should agree to be under the jurisdiction of an independent international court, but at least many of its members signed on to it. The court believes that it has jurisdiction over anyone involved in a conflict with a signatory. This is why the president is preauthorized by congress to use military force against the Netherlands, in the event that an amer…
That position is pure hubris.
No, the president of the US should just be considered by all to be the god-emperor of the planet.
Re: Microsoft blocked the email account of Chief Prosecutor of the ICC
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think either approach works. China is definitely digitally fenced-off and you don't see it having these issues.
> China is definitely digitally fenced-off and you don't see it having these issues. China is the textbook example of this problem. Political power in China routinely uses infrastructure to suppress or punish those who deviate from approved positions. This is precisely the risk that the article raises. And obviously, if the ICC were to switch to Chinese infrastructure, it would just be trading one leverage for a more…
Now this happens in US too... ICC must use its own mail servers. Actually any government or international organization must use its own infrastructure. Dependency on any 3rd party is an attack vector.
Re: Microsoft blocked the email account of Chief Prosecutor of the ICC
#10[dupe] More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44032717