"At its genesis, the International Criminal Court was expected to help prevent atrocities by ending the impunity of leaders and administering punishment for the commission of international crimes. More than a decade later, the ICC’s ability to achieve these broad aims has been questioned, as the ICC has reached only two guilty verdicts, and the United States, Russia, and China have not joined. Chazal considers how gaps between rhetoric and reality arise inthe work of the ICC, and concludes that these can be productive as they enable the Court to navigate a complex, international environment driven by geopolitics."Law and Social Inquiry Journal