Posted on 03/20/2023 5:35:52 AM PDT by McGruff
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy praised the International Criminal Court (ICC) Sunday for issuing an arrest warrant against Russian President Vladimir Putin. The comments came the day before the Russian leader hosts Chinese President Xi Jinping.
The ICC charged Putin with war crimes, although Russia does not recognize the jurisdiction of the court and is not likely to turn Putin over on the charges.
Nevertheless, Zelenskyy claimed the charges were a "turning point" in the war and show the international community is recognizing atrocities committed in the Russia-Ukraine war, which reached its one-year milestone last month.
"The evil state will be held accountable for every act of terror against Ukrainians," Zelenskyy said during a nightly address
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Who gets arrested first? Trump or Putin?
I kind of think in the end, Zelensky will be held accountable. He has plenty of ill gotten gains to flee with though.
No they haven’t signed on....and that’s why this won’t happen.....
Russia does not recognize the ICC, and the US’s relationship with the court has been fraught, according to Human Rights Watch. Ukraine does not fully recognize the court either.....nor China nor Israel nor the US.
Countries want to have control over the prosecution of their criminals and do not want to have the input of the ICC.
please go back and see what I responded to. Hint: it wasn’t about the ICC.
Russia has plenty of complaints about war crimes committed by Ukraine too.
That is why nothing will come of this except yakky yak by blustery Zeeper types and propagandists.
Right, Russia is going to complain about Ukrainian war crimes, committed during Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. Its like a burglar, complaining the home owner over reacted.
In principal, Jim Noble’s point is correct: “international law” doesn’t exist independently of other nations. As you yourself stated, it only has force if enough of the big nations agree to it.
After all, which if the big nations actually accept the jurisdiction of the UN in totality? Whenever votes go against them in the Assembly, they tend to simply ignore its dictates.
International law is simply that which is enforced by the global hegemon (or, failing that, sufficiently many Great Powers).
The ICC is not recognized by the USA nor Russia. Which major countries do????
War crimes is war crimes. Ukraine was warring and killing their own citizens in the Donbass and everyone knows it. They get no free pass.
That’s pretty much like any laws. If nobody enforces them or if they aren’t strong enough to the laws are moot.
This is correct. Some people confuse the ICC with the IJC, which is recognized by every UN member state, and which also handles such things as territorial and maritime disputes:
While we are not a party to Rome, we do use the ICC as a tool when it suits us. For example, we use it as a tool to signal regime change is our aim in an armed conflict with another country. For example, Libya. Muammar Gaddafi was indicted (case closed upon his gruesome death). If you check the ICC site, you will see that Libyans indicted for crimes are members of the old Gadaffi regime, none from the “rebel” side (who committed documented widespread serious war crimes during the war and egregious human rights abuses afterward):
https://www.icc-cpi.int/cases?f%5B0%5D=situation_name_colloquial_cases%3A679
By designating Putin as as an indicted war criminal, we also signal there will be no peace negotiation. We do not sit down to negotiate with war criminals and point fingers at anyone who does. We are, in effect, taking a negotiated peace settlement off the table, at least so long as Putin is in power.
The hawks in DC believe that such indictments work to cause regime change from within the country targeted. We shall see whether they are correct in the case of Russia. I have my doubts. And, if they are correct, whether they are pleased with Putin’s replacement.
Biden stated at the very beginning that one of our main goals was regime change in Russia. This indictment adds teeth.
I am not a fan of wiki, but their map looks accurate to me:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court
See also my #31
https://freerepublic.com/focus/news/4139447/posts?page=31#31
ICC site here:
Zelensky will end up fleeing to avoid his own assassination. He will be looking over his shoulder for the rest of his miserable life.
Do you ever get tired of spouting Russian lies? TOTAL of 3,500 civilians, FROM BOTH SIDES died in the conflict from 2014 to 2021.
14,000 is the number of the total number of casualties in the war in Donbass, killed by both parties between 2014 and 2021. 10,900 of them were soldiers.
On January 27, 2022, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights released its most recent estimate of the victims of the Donbass conflict from 2014 to December 31, 2021
According to the U.N., 10,900 victims were soldiers, of which 4,400 were Ukrainians and 6,500 pro-Russian combatants of or on behalf of the separatist pseudo-republics. Civilian victims were between 3,400 and 3,500.
https://ukraine.un.org/sites/default/files/2022-02/Conflict-related%20civilian%20casualties%20as%20of%2031%20December%202021%20%28rev%2027%20January%202022%29%20corr%20EN_0.pdf
You're just chasing your tail. Who has the authority or even the stones to enforce 'International Law'??? International Law is written on toilet paper and a good portion of this world wipe their butts with it on a daily basis. International Law is nonsense.
Article I of the US Constitution begins: “ALL legislative powers herein granted…”
The creators and ratifiers of the Constitution granted NO legislative authority binding on themselves EXCEPT to the US Congress.
Please stop this endless “international law” foolishness.
Faux continues to air DNC talking points and refuses to ask the obvious question.
“Why are we sending $$$ and weapons to Ukraine?”
There is “international law” and international “laws” or conventions respected by consent of the parties involved. Are US citizens subject to prosecution by the ICC roo court? Of course not. Disputes between countries can be solved at the ICJ (not to be confused with the ICC) when *both* countries involved *consent* to it. Often,these are territorial or maritime disputes, for example this one between Romania and Ukraine:
https://www.icj-cij.org/case/132
If one or both countries don’t accept the ICJ ruling in a territorial dispute, they can duke it out — the ICJ has no power to enforce it through force of arms. In practice, both parties have often reached some degree of agreement before putting a case before the ICJ. Even in contentious cases, the two parties negotiate with each other behind the scenes to arrive at what each can accept and the ICJ puts its stamp on the deal. This serves to reassure investors in offshore drilling projects in formerly disputed waters, etc., for example. It’s all quite practical when the two parties genuinely wish to resolve such disputes amicably and fairly and get on with business.
One of the more interesting cases involving the US was Avena:
https://www.icj-cij.org/case/128
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1562520
Of course whether the ICJ ruling is accepted/enforced is up to the counties involved. There is no supranational power that can force compliance. In that sense, there is no international law.
What we usually mean when we say “international law” is international conventions — the conventions (often called “laws”) universally recognized relate to navigation in international waters/airspace. We all endeavor to comply with these in our own self interest. Nobody wants their ships and planes smashing into each other. Then there are various treaties and conventions agreed upon between nations — but these cannot be enforced except through consent of (or armed conflict between) the parties. Again, in the ultimate sense, there is no international law.
See also my #31:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/news/4139447/posts?page=31#31
Just political rhetoric on the part of Zelensky. The ICC actions mean nothing to that conflict.
Yep, it's now definite, the Joke's On America!
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.