Posted on 06/24/2002 11:22:35 AM PDT by scarface367
The International Criminal Court does not enter into force until July 1, but Washington has already begun re-evaluating which U.N. peacekeeping missions are worth the risk that American troops could be held accountable to a supernational tribunal.
The first to go is East Timor. The Pentagon has decided to withdraw nearly 80 Americans from the U.N. mission there, saying that it's not worth exposing three military observers and 75 civilian police officers to the possibility of prosecution by the world court.
The United States tried to get a blanket exemption from foreign prosecution for all of the mission's troop-contributing nations when the mandate was renewed three weeks ago, but Security Council members refused to go along.
Many foreign diplomats and legal experts say the standard U.N. agreement with troop contributors — which sends peacekeepers accused of wrongdoing home for investigation and trial in their own countries — is sufficient protection.
But Washington wants a clearly worded policy with the weight of the Security Council behind it.
"I can tell you that, absent a response to our concerns, we will withdraw our personnel from East Timor," Marshall Billingslea, the deputy undersecretary of defense for negotiations policy, said Friday. "The ICC raises costs on a cost-benefit analysis."
A peacekeeping official said last week that the loss of the Americans wouldn't compromise the mission, but it would be nice to have the broadest possible involvement in international efforts. In fact, the United Nations is chronically short of civilian police, and losing a U.S. police presence could be a painful blow.
The Bush administration, meanwhile, has been trying to win similar language to exempt all foreign troops in Bosnia, with similar resistance.
They are having to much fun whining about the terror we a causing the rest of the world with our war machine.
But when trouble comes, it's a fact that the first call is to the U.S.A.
Please help us we have fallen and can't get up.
EXCELLENT!
Now get US out of the friggin' u.n.!
For comic relief?
Personally, I'd pull the US out of the UN, and allow the UN to continue to meet in New York--but treat them as any other non-governmental organization (no more diplomatic passports, no diplomatic immunity).
Yes. Isn't it wonderful?
a.cricket
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.