Bush Faces Major Test at UN on Exemption from War Crimes Court

[Spazito]

WASHINGTON, D.C., Jun 21 (OneWorld) - The willingness of the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush (news - web sites) to show greater deference to the United Nations (news - web sites) and international law will be severely tested this week as it tries to persuade the Security Council to extend its exemption of U.S. troops serving in peacekeeping operations from the jurisdiction the new International Criminal Court (ICC) for another year.

To prevail, Washington must secure at least nine votes from the 15-member Council, but indications so far are that it is likely to fall short of that goal. In the past, the administration has threatened to veto UN peacekeeping operations if it does not get its way on the issue.

Despite widespread unhappiness with the resolution, which is vehemently opposed by international human rights groups who say that the exemption violates international law and undermines the global struggle to end impunity for the most serious human rights abuses, it was considered likely to be approved until the photographs of the abuse of Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq (news - web sites) became public.


Subsequent revelations of more widespread abuses, as well as high-level administration policy memos that appeared to sanction torture, have greatly bolstered opposition to the resolution, provoking UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan (news - web sites) himself to criticize it more harshly than ever before.


more

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/oneworld/4536885771087835652

[Don_G]

1. The US Won't Get It

It's like a bear with diarrhea wandering the woods---there's too much shite lying around uncovered to go unnoticed.

Just avoid the bear in the first place.

[struggle4progress]

3. Hope you are right!

[Fear]

6. nice example!

;)

[molly]

2. The US needs the UN now - we are over-extended

"In the past, the administration has threatened to veto UN peacekeeping operations if it does not get its way on the issue."

Too bad * didn't think about this and plan ahead before sanctioning and/or ordering prisoner abuse.

[uptown ruler]

4. why should we get it?

Spreading The Word
The Irony Curtain Shop

[Hawkeye-X]

5. Prediction:

UN Security Council rejects the extempion, and as a result, Angola passes a resolution telling U.S. "FUCK OFF" and also moves to remove the U.S. temporarily off its permananent seat off the Security Council until a President is duly elected.

Hawkeye-X

[geek tragedy]

7. This is D.O.A.

SC members will tell aWol to fuck himself and wait until the Kerry administration comes in.

[Kagemusha]

8. Even though it is DOA...

What will Rumsfeld and Cheney do if this is refused? They are NOT going to jail, as far as they are concerned, regardless of how much blood must be spilt to prevent it, on principle if nothing else...

That's what concerns me about this.

[symbolman]

9. It would be great if BUsh

couldn't leave the country anymore without being arrested :)

I guess Kissenger had to avoid some countries due to being indicted for war crimes..

[riverwalker]

10. my daydream....

someday in the future......Paul Wolfowitz sitting in a beach chair on the French Riviera sipping a drink, when suddenly a group of Interpol agents approach him "excuse us, Monsieur Wolfowitz, you must come with us..." They take him to the Hague, give him an orange jumpsuit, and the trial begins.

[struggle4progress]

11. U.S. Rewords a Resolution on Immunity for Its Troops

The United States circulated a reworded resolution among Security Council members on Tuesday evening to try to overcome broad opposition to its effort to keep its troops immune from any prosecution by the International Criminal Court.
<snip>

The version that American diplomats circulated on Tuesday dropped language in the original proposal that expressed the intention to renew the one-year exemption each July 1 for further 12-month periods "for as long as may be necessary."

Mr. Annan had protested that the clause would perpetuate United Nations approval of what was meant to be a temporary emergency departure from international law.

The new language pledges that this request for a one-year exemption is the last.
<snip>

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/23/international/23NATI.html

[Spazito]

13. You know, just when I think they cannot be any more arrogant...

they do this:

The new language pledges that this request for a one-year exemption is the last.


There is NOT one member of the UN Security Council that would give a penny for the truth of that outrageous statement, imo!

Even more seriously, one must ask what is it they want to do that is so egregious that they are so desperate to get an exemption from war crime charges??? What is it in "Don't commit war crimes and you don't need an exemption" and "Commit war crimes and expect to suffer the consequences". Unbelievable!

[struggle4progress]

14. Good for us they're arrogant: they never know they're @#$%ing up!

[Jack Rabbit]

12. Who who vote to give Bush any kind of exemption right now?

That would be ludicrous.

[2cents]

15. LOL Yeah, like the members of the Security Council ..

have been tough nuts to crack. Show'em the green and the chimp'll skate clean.