In addition: in the UNSC negotiations, the US won agreement that ICC jurisdiction would not apply to any crimes committed by the US in Libya.
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 11:47 AM, ken hanly <norths...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Isn't the US not being a tad hypocritical in trying to bring Gadaffi the > Hague? > > http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/us-un-and-international-law-8-24/us-opposition-to-the-icc-8-29.html > > > The United States government has consistently opposed an international court > that could hold US military and political leaders to a uniform global standard > of justice. The Clinton administration participated actively in negotiations > towards the International Criminal Court treaty, seeking Security Council > screening of cases. If adopted, this would have enabled the US to veto any > dockets it opposed. When other countries refused to agree to such an unequal > standard of justice, the US campaigned to weaken and undermine the court. The > Bush administration, coming into office in 2001 as the Court neared > implementation, adopted an extremely active opposition. Washington began to > negotiate bilateral agreements with other countries, insuring immunity of US > nationals from prosecution by the Court. As leverage, Washington threatened > termination of economic aid, withdrawal of military assistance, and other > painful measures. The Obama administration has so far made greater efforts to > engage with the Court. It is participating with the Court's governing bodies > and > it is providing support for the Court's ongoing prosecutions. Washington, > however, has no intention to join the ICC, due to its concern about possible > charges against US nationals. > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Robert Naiman <nai...@justforeignpolicy.org> > To: Progressive Economics <pen-l@lists.csuchico.edu> > Sent: Fri, April 1, 2011 11:21:46 AM > Subject: [Pen-l] How Many Should Die To Send Qaddafi to the Hague? > > http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/04/01/962355/-How-Many-Should-Die-To-Send-Qaddafi-to-the-Hague > > > In which I note that according to a Quinnipiac University poll, voters > say 61 - 30 percent that removing Qaddafi from power is not worth > having American troops "fight and possibly die" for. It seems likely > that if the question were asked, is sending Qaddafi to the > International Criminal Court a military objective worth having > American troops "fight and possibly die" for?, the result would be > even more lopsided against. Yet, that is the present policy of the US, > as it blocks an Italian and Turkish proposal to allow Qaddafi to go > into exile. If the US is blocking a diplomatic proposal that could end > an unpopular war, shouldn't Congress have some say in that? > > -- > Robert Naiman > Policy Director > Just Foreign Policy > www.justforeignpolicy.org > nai...@justforeignpolicy.org > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > pen-l@lists.csuchico.edu > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > pen-l@lists.csuchico.edu > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > -- Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org nai...@justforeignpolicy.org _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list pen-l@lists.csuchico.edu https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
