Warhamer is pretty close - they're more than US Centric, they were written specifically for the US. The "International" part of the title is more marketing gimmick than anything else. When they combined the major regional model codes back at the end of the 1990s, they wanted there to be no question that it was the "superior" code. At least one of the pre-IBC codes had "national" in the title, and the other came from a self proclaimed "international" organization - so the only way to be bigger than that in name is to call yourself an international code. (
Here's a paper on the evolution of model codes in the US.) If you look through at anything relating to geographic location (wind loads, seismic loads, snow loads, etc.), it only gives data for the US or references more specific standards that only reference the US.
It's also important to understand that the IBC is NOT a building code - it's a
model building code. That means it is essentially worthless until adopted by the authority having jurisdiction. In the US, that means that your state, county or city building department (depending upon how government authority and sovereignty is proportioned in the state, because it can vary) has passed a law referencing the IBC (or other I-codes) and making them law. Not sure how that works where you are, but I imagine there would be something similar.
All that said - the principals in the IBC could certainly be applied in other countries (and frequently are). The physics governing the performance of structures under load doesn't change based on geopolitical boundaries. You just have to understand how they fit together legally, and how the standards applicable to materials in your area compare to those in the US and how the codes interact.