The Hague: The EU has promised to keep the International Criminal Court working after Washington announced new ICC sanctions on 9 October 2026. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the United States would “ban transactions with this rogue court”, and the measures freeze ICC assets held in the United States. US companies and individuals now have six months to end their dealings with the court.
The Trump administration accuses the ICC of political bias and of unfairly targeting Americans and Israelis over alleged war crimes. The court rejects that charge and calls the ICC sanctions an attempt to obstruct justice and an assault on the rule of law. ICC President Tomoko Akane said the court will continue its mandate with independence and impartiality.
The European Commission reacted within hours. It called the ICC sanctions “deeply regrettable”, said the EU stands ready to take the measures necessary so the court can keep working, and saw “room for dialogue” in the six-month delay. That wording leaves a diplomatic door open while Brussels prepares its options.
On Saturday, High Representative Kaja Kallas spoke for the bloc in a statement published by the Council. She said attacks or threats against the court are “not acceptable” and stressed that the ICC plays a crucial role in international law. She also rejected the idea that the court targets particular states.
European Council President Antonio Costa and Dutch Prime Minister Rob Jetten reinforced that message in The Hague on Friday. Costa described international justice as the alternative to revenge, while Jetten pledged that the Netherlands, host state of the court, will do what it takes to defend it.
The sharpest question now is whether the EU activates its blocking statute. The 1996 instrument, Regulation (EC) No 2271/96, bars European firms from complying with certain extraterritorial sanctions imposed by third countries. A blocking mechanism would prohibit companies from obeying the US measures actively or by deliberate omission, which could cushion some of the impact. No decision has been taken, and officials describe it only as a possible response.
The practical stakes reach beyond politics. The ICC relies on banks, software providers and contractors to pay staff, protect data and run investigations. If European suppliers hesitate under the ICC sanctions, the court could struggle to function even if its legal mandate stays intact.
The six-month window now sets the clock for Brussels. Member states must decide whether to shield the court with legal tools or to rely on dialogue with Washington, and the outcome will show how far the EU will go to defend the international legal order against ICC sanctions.





