ICC triumph over Bush

Purring

A perfect day in New York.

A day worth crossing the Atlantic for - even for putting up with a two hour queue to get through Homeland Security at Dulles Airport.

The programme delivered far more than it promised. Who would have thought that a fresh look at the battered United Nations or the criticised International Criminal Court would have sent us on to Second Avenue with a song in our hearts?

The star of stars was John Washburn convenor of the International Criminal Court (ICC). We all enjoy good stories especially ones like his with a very happy ending.  In a small period of international sanity between the fall of the Berlin Wall and 9/11 the ICC was created. It could not have happened before or since.

Its mission is to try major transgressors responsible for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Bush stupidly tried to wreck the ICC by insisting that it should not apply to America – the doctrine of American exceptionality. This was a joy to some Americans but an embarrassment to intelligent ones.

Deplorably, the Bush administration beat up small states that intended to support the ICC. That battle was lost when China cuddled up to the states that Bush had annoyed.

Now public opinion has triumphed because of the widespread understanding of the Darfur tragedy. Americans insisted than the perpetrators of the slaughter in Darfur should be brought to book. It could happen only through the ICC. The Bush opposition to one of the great world legal reforms is crumbling.

Any new administration will reverse Bush’s crass opposition. We members of the Western European Defence Committee purred our approval at the prospect of an Obama Administration.

 Obama-rama

Another great piece of news is the preparations for a new approach to Iran from a forthcoming Obama presidency.

Replacing the cold war rhetoric would be a reasoned dialogue similar to the Nixon Shanghai Declaration with the Chinese. Bush has demonised a manageable relationship with Iran.

The author of he plan told us that, ‘If we discuss those things on which America and Iran agree and those things on which they disagree. From that trust can be built and the situation detoxified.’

 The biggest threat to world peace is the divide between the Western Christian Jewish world and the Eastern Muslim world. Almost every action by Bush, often disgracefully supported by us, has deepened the gulf between the opposing worlds.

A blueprint for an Obama bridge building approach to Iran is ready to go into action. There is palpable excitement here in the USA at the prospect of an Obama Presidency. It’s almost univeral optimism fom the knowledgeable Defence experts who have addressed us. Most of nation is ashamed of the dark years of Bush belligerence and the fatuous invented ‘Global War on Terror” – cynically used by the Republicans to whip up national fervour. They long for a fresh start.

It must be Obama.

UN-ese

Cicero had the same problem.

One of our speakers made a fascinating point about the influence of language in introducing new concepts. Part of the drudgery of the UN is translating documents into dozens of languages. The UN has created their own language of 'UN-ese' to describe their missions in human rights. It is specialised, technical and creative.

Translating UN-ese into Arabic has influenced thinking throughout the Arabic speaking world. There was no previous  non-religious vocabulary to describe human rights. Now the vocabulary exists, there is gradual but growing acceptance of these progressive concepts.

Cicero had the same problem striving to express subtle concepts of moral philosophy into Latin. texts had been handed down in vocabulary rich Greek. There no Latin word for 'essence'.  Cicero invented new words.

The new words deepened understanding and opened new avenues of thought.

Comments

[Huw O'Sullivan]

In US most of nation claim to be ashamed of the years of Bush, but that's just like when major won for the tories, nobody would admit voting tory, they just did anyway.
Last presidential election was between two people with same policy on middle east but one acted embarassed and the other acted proud, given the choice americans prefer to be proud of their crimes. Obama would be no better than Bush and probably worse, as he'd do things to prove he wasn't soft on terror etc. Cannot see any US administration going along with ICC, too many of them would have to go in front of it. Still, don't lose the optimism Paul.

[paulflynn]

I am convinced you are wrong, Huw. The ICC deal only with major crimes that have been commited on a very large scale. The USA has little to lose. Their policies in Iraq and Helmand were foolish with dreadful outcome. But their intentions were honourable. It not a deliberate holocaust or genocide.

What has to be challenge is the US's opt out from was should be a universal court.

[Huw O'Sullivan]

I must admit to being more than a little gobsmacked with your stance that the US intentions were honourable, I had never realised you believed that to be the case.
I also cannot understand how you arrived at that opinion, it seems to fly in the face of all the facts. Needless to say I do not share your belief, nor do many other people and I rather suspect that the US is aware of this, if they were not and operated under the delusion that everybody thought they were bumbling but well intentioned they most certainly would not have a problem with signing up to ICC jurisdiction.
But I believe that the nation that vetoed the UN resolution that all countries should observe international law in 1986 , is well aware that your view is, while being one they wish to foster, not one that is held by many people.

[Huw O'Sullivan]

I will easily grant Paul, that the invasion of Iraq was not for the purpose of holocaust or genocide. But the ICC is not limited to those extremes, it covers plain and simple war crimes also, a similar difference perhaps as that between a murderer and a serial killer.
Nuremberg has already given us the principles on war crimes and international crimes.
To quote the chief American prosecutor at the time, Robert H Jackson
"To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

I think that would suggest that most would expect US actions time after time to come within the remit of the ICC.

[Elizabeth]

Dr Taylor teaches us how to attain deep inner peace - easily, simply, without drugs, anytime we want it. Forgive me for doing everything I can to be sure everyone reads this book and sees this video, but I think all of us benefit and in the larger sense, if everyone reads this, our world will benefit in a very large way.