Monday, February 26, 2007
"Don't throw me into the UN's ICC Briarpatch"
Remember when Abu Ghraib was the Left’s concern du jour?
“But it's not clear that the world will accept our courts' verdicts—particularly if some of the soldiers and intelligence officers are acquitted. In light of this case's importance for the perception of America around the world, an international consensus that justice has been achieved matters as much as—if not more than—what happens inside the courtroom.” Keeping the ICC out of Abu Ghraib.
Wouldn’t it be great if just for once we would do the right thing and let the world have a say in our affairs:
“One option that's not on the table would perhaps best serve the interests of global justice: a trial before the International Criminal Court.”
Now our failure to submit to the ICC is considered by many to be a significant failure of the Bush administration (although President Clinton never submitted it for approval either) and yet another example of our tone-deaf interaction with global community.
Well, those convicted soldiers are no doubt saying a silent prayer thanking all that the ICC never got a hold of them:
“But the 15-judge panel rejected Bosnia's claim that the Serbian state was responsible for the killing, saying it did not have effective control over the Bosnian Serb forces it had helped arm and finance. Instead, …
“Serbia, "could, and should, have acted to prevent the genocide, but did not," the court's president, Rosalyn Higgins, told reporters.” U.N. Court Clears Serbia of Genocide
Whoa – ease up, ICC. Those Serbians may have been genocidal or - according to you – just somewhat inattentive but they still deserve to be treated with some respect. But Judge Higgins is mad and won't let up:
“Higgins also condemned Serbia's failure to hand over Bosnian Serb Gen. Ratko Mladic, indicted more than a decade ago by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia for the genocide in Srebrenica.”
Ouch! As a result:
“The order to arrest Mladic and other genocide suspects was part of the binding judgment in the case. Failure to comply can be reported to the U.N. Security Council. However, international officials have been pushing Serbia to hand over Mladic for nearly 12 years without success.”
The Security Council? It’s going to suck to be Mladic.
Still, Bosnia thought that maybe some compensation could be coming their way but the ICC wisely considered that the easy way out:
“But she said the court ruled that the Serbian state could not be held directly responsible for genocide, so paying reparations to Bosnia would be inappropriate even though Serbia had failed to prevent genocide and punish the perpetrators.” Serbia cleared of genocide, failed to stop killing
Okay – just to rehash:
Abu Ghraib = jail time.
Genocide of a people = threatening to tell on the genociders to the Security Council.
Abu Ghraib = Fines, reduction of rank etc.
Genocide of a people= .....did I mention the whole bit about telling the Security Council?.
“But it's not clear that the world will accept our courts' verdicts—particularly if some of the soldiers and intelligence officers are acquitted. In light of this case's importance for the perception of America around the world, an international consensus that justice has been achieved matters as much as—if not more than—what happens inside the courtroom.” Keeping the ICC out of Abu Ghraib.
Wouldn’t it be great if just for once we would do the right thing and let the world have a say in our affairs:
“One option that's not on the table would perhaps best serve the interests of global justice: a trial before the International Criminal Court.”
Now our failure to submit to the ICC is considered by many to be a significant failure of the Bush administration (although President Clinton never submitted it for approval either) and yet another example of our tone-deaf interaction with global community.
Well, those convicted soldiers are no doubt saying a silent prayer thanking all that the ICC never got a hold of them:
“But the 15-judge panel rejected Bosnia's claim that the Serbian state was responsible for the killing, saying it did not have effective control over the Bosnian Serb forces it had helped arm and finance. Instead, …
“Serbia, "could, and should, have acted to prevent the genocide, but did not," the court's president, Rosalyn Higgins, told reporters.” U.N. Court Clears Serbia of Genocide
Whoa – ease up, ICC. Those Serbians may have been genocidal or - according to you – just somewhat inattentive but they still deserve to be treated with some respect. But Judge Higgins is mad and won't let up:
“Higgins also condemned Serbia's failure to hand over Bosnian Serb Gen. Ratko Mladic, indicted more than a decade ago by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia for the genocide in Srebrenica.”
Ouch! As a result:
“The order to arrest Mladic and other genocide suspects was part of the binding judgment in the case. Failure to comply can be reported to the U.N. Security Council. However, international officials have been pushing Serbia to hand over Mladic for nearly 12 years without success.”
The Security Council? It’s going to suck to be Mladic.
Still, Bosnia thought that maybe some compensation could be coming their way but the ICC wisely considered that the easy way out:
“But she said the court ruled that the Serbian state could not be held directly responsible for genocide, so paying reparations to Bosnia would be inappropriate even though Serbia had failed to prevent genocide and punish the perpetrators.” Serbia cleared of genocide, failed to stop killing
Okay – just to rehash:
Abu Ghraib = jail time.
Genocide of a people = threatening to tell on the genociders to the Security Council.
Abu Ghraib = Fines, reduction of rank etc.
Genocide of a people= .....did I mention the whole bit about telling the Security Council?.
