Posted on 04/30/2008 7:56:47 PM PDT by Coleus
A senior Bush administration official said Friday that the U.S. now accepts the "reality" of the International Criminal Court, and that Washington would consider aiding the Hague tribunal in its investigation of atrocities in Sudan's Darfur region. "The U.S. must acknowledge that the ICC enjoys a large body of international support, and that many countries will look to the ICC as the preferred mechanism" for punishing war crimes that individual countries can't or won't address, John Bellinger, the State Department's chief lawyer, told a conference in Chicago marking t
he 10th anniversary of the tribunal's founding treaty, the Rome Statute. More than 100 countries have ratified the treaty. Although it reiterated longstanding U.S. concerns about the court, Mr. Bellinger's speech represented a rhetorical turnabout for an administration that came to power determined to hobble the movement for a permanent war crimes tribunal.
"This is a meaty piece of work," said Richard Dicker, international justice director for Human Rights Watch. "It's impossible to imagine such a statement four years ago." Shortly before the court opened in 2002, the Bush administration "unsigned" the Rome Statute, which President Clinton had approved before leaving office. President Bush subsequently signed legislation authorizing military action, should the court arrest an American, and limiting U.S. dealings with the tribunal.
An architect of the White House's earlier policies dismissed Mr. Bellinger's remarks as "pabulum" from a State Department that is too solicitous of international institutions. "It would be a great speech in the first Clinton administration, and probably a great speech in the second Clinton administration," said John Bolton, the former ambassador to the United Nations who, as undersecretary of state, signed the letter repudiating Rome Statute. "It reflects the yearning the Rice State Department has for acceptance" by academics and foreign intellectuals, Mr. Bolton said.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Tell the UN to stick the ICC up its ass.
I would accept it as well if one person can point out where it gets its moral authority to judge anyone?
Is Bellinger f’n insane? State Dep’t always looking out for other countries at the expense of ours.
The internationalists at Foggy Bottom speaking for themselves?
It’ll be a cold day in.... Oh well, I’m just an American. I have a problem with this but that’s just me. It looks like the “sovereign nation” crap only applies to Indian reservations these days.
/piss
We need to hear more about this “accepting” business.
What is the ICC relationship with the US courts?? Will it have any effect on the sovereignty of the US?? etc.??
We can’t just jump off a precipice because other countries are doing so.
This requires a serious debate.
A senior Bush administration official said Friday that the U.S. now accepts the “reality” of the International Criminal Court,
Well, since the Bush administration has been nice enough to accept the ICC, maybe the ICC will return the facor and indict the Bush administration for ‘war crimes’.
Are politicians just born stupid or what?
Yet another reason why Bush isn’t a conservative.
Our highest law is the Constitution. Period.
The problem is, who decides what a “war crime” is, and for what political motivation?
sonofa.....................
Frankly, if the EU wants to use their ICC to prosecute war criminals that's fine.
What's unfortunate is that's where they'll stop. Just prosecute; no real punishment; maybe 30 days bad behavior charge.
The ICC doesn't execute anyone.
.
US Military Personel would be at risk or prosecution for obeying orders in a theater of war that are later portrayed by the press as " War Crimes."
Because our nation has a sense of morality, it can be used against us, and a soldier who is an alleged "baby killer" could actually halt or redefine US policy by virtue of action of the ICC and press coverage.
In other words the people would no longer have a sovereign nation.
The ICC could also effectively implement gun control laws enacted by the United Nations, in direct treaty superiority to the 2nd ammendment.
This is really horrible news, and if its an initiative at State, it needs to be halted and decapitated, forthwith!
There are plenty of anti-American folks, lots of them right here in the USA, who would gladly drag Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld before the ICC for “war crimes”. Lately they have been wanting to punish individual soldiers as well, since they enlisted and followed orders. You can bet that any preemptive war is viewed as a crime. Occupation is viewed as a crime. So where does that leave the USA and Israel in the ICC venue? We cannot allow our enemies and our “allies” to criminalize any actions we must take. We can save their butts time after time, and they will just prosecute us anyway.
Thats easy to do, you go to war.
No need of a court to do it.
Consensus (fashion)
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.