The EU-Tajikistan Arrest Warrant Dispute: A Clash of International Law and Geopolitics

The ICC arrest warrant and Tajikistan's diplomatic choices reflect the complex interplay between legal norms and realpolitik in the global order.

On October 10, 2025, the European External Action Service (EUES) issued an official statement accusing Tajikistan of failing to fulfill its obligations under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) by failing to arrest Russian President Vladimir Putin during his visit to Dushanbe for a regional summit. The statement directly addressed a core contradiction: the conflict between international legal obligations and a country's actual diplomatic choices.

As Putin and Tajik President Emomali Rahmon appeared together in Dushanbe, emphasizing the "high level of Tajik-Russian relations," the EU statement revealed tensions arising from differing interpretations of international rules.

01 The Clash of Legal Obligations and Diplomatic Realities

The EUES statement cited Tajikistan's obligations as a party to the Rome Statute, emphasizing its responsibility to execute the ICC arrest warrant. The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Putin in March 2023, charging him with, among other things, "unlawful deportation and transfer of children from the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine in the context of his unlawful war of aggression against Ukraine."

The legal basis for this arrest warrant is the Rome Statute, which establishes the ICC's jurisdiction over genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes of aggression.

Tajikistan signed the Rome Statute in 1998, becoming a state party. Under the Statute, states are obliged to cooperate fully with the ICC, including by arresting indicted individuals. It is this legal obligation that the EU statement emphasized.

However, geopolitical realities complicate this legal obligation. Tajikistan maintains close political, economic, and security ties with Russia. At a regional summit, Tajik President Emomali Rahmon publicly emphasized the high level of bilateral relations, demonstrating Tajikistan's unwillingness to jeopardize its ties with Moscow over the arrest warrant.

02 The Authority and Limitations of the International Criminal Court

As a permanent international criminal judicial institution, the authority of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is based on the Rome Statute. As of 2025, 124 states had ratified the Rome Statute and become parties to it. However, major powers such as Russia and the United States have not acceded to the Statute.

The ICC's enforcement mechanism has structural limitations. Unlike domestic judicial systems, the ICC does not have its own police force and relies entirely on the cooperation of States Parties to execute arrest warrants. When States Parties are reluctant to cooperate due to political considerations, the Court lacks an effective enforcement mechanism.

These limitations have already been demonstrated in similar cases. For example, the ICC's arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faced similar enforcement challenges. Israel and the United States, both non-States Parties to the Rome Statute, questioned the Court's jurisdiction.

The EU's criticism of Tajikistan in its statement unfolded against this backdrop. As a staunch supporter of the ICC, the EU seeks to use diplomatic pressure to compel States Parties to fulfill their obligations. However, whether such pressure will be effective depends on the target country's comprehensive geopolitical, economic, and security considerations.

03 EU Central Asia Strategy and Values-Based Diplomacy

The EU's accusations against Tajikistan are not isolated incidents, but rather part of its overall Central Asian strategy. The EU's Central Asian policy has consistently operated on a dual track: promoting values ​​such as democracy, human rights, and the rule of law; and safeguarding its practical interests in the energy and security sectors.

At the values ​​level, the EU uses a variety of tools to export norms to Central Asian countries. For example, the European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights supports human rights, rule of law, and democratization projects in Central Asian countries. The EU also holds regular human rights dialogues with Central Asian countries, focusing on issues such as judicial reform, freedom of expression, and the development of civil society.

However, the EU's values-based diplomacy in Central Asia has encountered challenges due to cultural differences and political realities. Central Asian countries have diverse political traditions and historical backgrounds, and their own understandings of democracy and human rights. EU criticisms are often dismissed by local governments as lacking the necessary context or failing to consider the region's unique challenges.

In the case of Tajikistan, the EU paid particular attention to the human rights situation. In July 2024, the EU again called on the Tajik authorities to thoroughly investigate human rights violations and expressed concern about the imprisonment of human rights defenders, journalists, and bloggers. The EU emphasized that "an independent and vibrant civil society and a free media are essential for the development of a democratic society."

04 Tajikistan's Geopolitical Dilemma

Tajikistan faces a difficult choice between the EU and Russia. As a small Central Asian country, Tajikistan is highly dependent on Russia in both economic and security sectors. At the same time, the EU is also a key partner of Tajikistan.

Economically, Tajikistan benefits from its close relationship with Russia. A large number of Tajik workers work in Russia, and remittances are crucial to the Tajik economy. In the security sector, the two countries cooperate particularly closely, jointly addressing the terrorist threat emanating from Afghanistan.

At the same time, Tajikistan maintains development cooperation with the EU. The EU is a key aid provider to Tajikistan, supporting projects in areas such as water management, energy security, and border control. In November 2023, the tenth annual cooperation committee meeting between the two sides was held in Brussels to discuss strengthening the partnership and cooperation agreement.

Amid this complex landscape of interests, Tajikistan has adopted a balanced diplomatic strategy. It is reluctant to offend Russia, an important neighbor, nor does it want to worsen relations with the EU. The failure to execute the arrest warrant for Putin reflects Tajikistan's consideration of its real national interests.

05 The Legal and Political Dimensions of International Sanctions

The EU's accusations against Tajikistan touch upon the broader issue of international sanctions. International sanctions are generally categorized as diplomatic, economic, and military. The EU's criticism of Tajikistan falls under the umbrella of diplomatic pressure and does not rise to the level of formal sanctions.

In international practice, sanctions can be categorized as individual sanctions or collective sanctions. Individual sanctions are imposed by individual countries, while collective sanctions are implemented by international organizations such as the United Nations. The EU's statement can be seen as a form of political pressure aimed at forcing Tajikistan to change its behavior.

The effectiveness of international sanctions has always been controversial. Targeted sanctions (such as travel bans and asset freezes) are more common than comprehensive economic sanctions and are intended to reduce collateral damage to civilians. However, in practice, sanctions often fail to achieve their intended objectives.

In the case of Tajikistan, the EU has not yet announced specific sanctions, remaining at the level of verbal criticism. This approach both expresses its stance and leaves room for a diplomatic solution. The EU may hope to use pressure to force Tajikistan to change its behavior in similar situations in the future, while at the same time avoiding pushing Tajikistan completely into Russia's arms.

The International Criminal Court's arrest warrant faces a practical challenge in enforcement. The EU can exert diplomatic pressure, but it will struggle to change Tajikistan's assessment of its own national interests.

As great power competition intensifies, the clash between international legal norms and geopolitical realities is likely to become more frequent. The ICC's arrest warrant will continue to test countries' ability to balance diplomatic commitments with practical interests.

For small countries like Tajikistan, seeking a balance between major powers is not a choice but a means of survival.