ARTICLE: "U.S. Accepts International Criminal Court," by Jess Bravin, Wall Street Journal, 26-27 April 2008, p. A5A.
Hold your horses!
State's chief lawyer now says the U.S. "must acknowledge that the ICC enjoys a large body of international support."
Well, duh!
Same guy gave the usual bitch list to boot, so don't hold your breath on hearing Bush or Cheney make any different noises on the subject.
Bush-Cheney "unsigned" the Rome Statute setting up the ICC in 2002, and Bush then signed legislation "authorizing military action, should the court arrest an American."
Nice, but par for the neocon course.
But I suppose years of Abu Ghraib and Gitmo stories do soften the administration up a bit.
All the prez candidates make similar noises while offering similar bitch lists--wah wah wah!
The only reason why we can't "submit" to the ICC is because we don't want anyone telling us when we can employ our military might.
If you want that kind of freedom, you better expect balancing.
And when you can't afford your military, expect others to "vote" down your implied global service by making it harder for you to float public debt. Other powers will simply stop paying for the service—unless they see it offered according to some mutually agreed-upon rule set.
The ICC is one such rule set. We ignore it at our strategic risk.
Comments (2)
Well if the DEMS come to power will be interesting to watch their struggle with ICC issues!
Posted by William R. Cumming. | May 12, 2008 8:43 AM
The left in the west will use the ICC to indite and harass US Policy makers that they disagree with. This will unleash anti-US Lawfare activities in Court System built for PR.
Posted by purpleslog | May 12, 2008 1:28 PM