Indeed, the threat of an ICC proceeding may help encourage national prosecutions in states that would otherwise avoid bringing war criminals to trial. The ICC will not be a place for punishing forces who commit minor offenses during a peace-keeping operation. The ICC is set up to address genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The levels of atrocity envisioned in the definitions of these crimes makes it highly unlikely that these definitions would apply to offenses which may occur during a peace-keeping operation. Even when barbaric acts are committed, a functioning national court system would have the first right to step in, given the principle of complementarity.
Many countries have courts martial that are equipped to adjudicate such rare cases.
An individual would only be brought before the ICC when national courts have failed to prosecute. The experience of the former Yugoslavia directly refutes the argument that peace may require the delay of justice. The Security Council established the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia while the conflict in Bosnia was still going on. Indeed, the prosecution of Bosnian war-crimes suspects played a constructive role in the Dayton peace process. The indictment of Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic, the former Bosnian Serb political and military leaders, has helped to sideline two of the most violent opponents of ethnic co-existence, which lies at the heart of the Dayton peace plan.