|
U.S. Seeks to Extend Int’l Court Deal
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - In an effort to avoid replaying a confrontation, the United States said Thursday it will seek to extend the deal exempting American peacekeepers from prosecution by the new international war crimes tribunal.Last year's battle pitted the United States against countries around the world, including close European allies, Canada and Mexico. It ended in July when the Security Council agreed to exempt from arrest or trial peacekeepers from the United States and other countries that have not ratified the treaty establishing the International Criminal Court. Not going to be any different this year. U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte told The Associated Press on Thursday that the United States would like ``a technical extension ... of the resolution,'' though he did not give a timeframe or say when a draft resolution would be introduced. ``It's very straightforward. We wouldn't introduce any substantive changes into the resolution we adopted last year by unanimity in the council, and we would assume - certainly hope - that this would receive overwhelming support,'' he said. Richard Dicker, director of the International Justice Program at Human Rights Watch, said the stakes this year are ``in some ways even higher than last year because if the resolution was rolled over without a debate and without objection, it would increase the chance of its becoming a permanent fixture.'' What a smart boy you are! But council diplomats said the United States was pressing for a quick vote without an open debate. The court culminated a campaign that began with the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials for World War II's German and Japanese war criminals. It has jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide committed after July 1, 2002, involving any of the 90 nations adhering to the treaty, but will step in only when states are unwilling or unable to dispense justice. The United States objects to the idea that Americans could be subject to its jurisdiction even if it is not party to the pact. Washington argues that the court could be used for frivolous or politically motivated prosecutions, especially of American troops. During last year's battle, the United States threatened to end far-flung peacekeeping operations established or authorized by the United Nations - from Afghanistan and the Mideast to Bosnia and Sierra Leone - if it was not exempted. The final deal dented the court's underlying principle that no one should be exempt from punishment for war crimes, and it angered court supporters and human rights groups. Simple choice: exempt us or fly Air Ukraine to your peacekeeping jobs. Posted by: Steve White 2003-06-06 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=15145 |