Posted on 12/17/2003 4:26:53 AM PST by yonif
There is a growing school of thought in the US that sees the International Criminal Court and the development of international criminal and humanitarian law over the past decade as a conspiracy against the US, former US ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues David Scheffer said Tuesday .
But he denied allegations that the US refusal to ratify the Rome Statute and become a party to the International Criminal Court, or to ask for special treatment by the court, was an immoral act.
Scheffer, now a law professor at George Washington University in Washington, was speaking during the second day of a conference entitled "The International Criminal Court and the Advent of International Criminal Justice," sponsored by the Minerva Center for Human Rights at Hebrew University and Tel Aviv University.
Scheffer said neoconservatives in Washington have coined a new term, "lawfare," to describe alleged foreign attempts to hamper the US in defending its security and national interests, including the promotion of human rights in the world.
He said he could not underestimate the importance of this new way of thinking. According to it, "The developments that have accelerated in international criminal law and international humanitarian law over the past decade are increasingly threatening the objectives of US foreign policy and the national security of the US.
[This school of thought maintains that] there is essentially a conspiracy out there, outside the US, and by naive individuals within the US, to constrain the ability of the US to act boldly on the world scene to protect not only the security of the US but also to do exactly what we all thought the world wanted us to do, that is, enforce international law in precarious situations."
Scheffer, who led US negotiators participating in the drafting of the Rome Statute, said it was clear all along that the Senate would not ratify the document and join the court.
In this context, American negotiators nonetheless asked to be accorded special status in view of the special role the US plays in the world.
According to Scheffer, US troops are deployed in more than 100 countries and the Americans sought some mechanism to protect their armed forces and policy-makers from international criminal indictments.
"Our purpose was imminently moral in that we wanted to use our military power primarily in pursuit of Security Council resolutions," he maintained.
She actually stated that international law overrides our Constitution which, IMHO, should be grounds for removal from the SCOTUS. But the gutless wonders in DC won't do a thing. Oh well............
The PotUS is responsible to the Electoral College, or to the Senate. All of whom, by original constitutional design, are responsible to the states--who are responsible to the voters of the US.
Any attempt to make US servicemen responsible to an authority outside that chain of responsibility is in US law inherently a crime. If that outside authority is a foreign power or agent thereof, it is an act of war against the US. If done by a US citizen, therefore, it is treason.
If you change that to something like: '"lawfare" describes attempts to hamper US citizens in the exercise of their liberty and their pursuit of happiness' you come pretty close to what elements in the US are trying to do to the rest of us. That needs a little polishing, but it's close.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.