Home » Posts tagged 'international criminal court'
Tag Archives: international criminal court
U.S. to International Criminal Court: We Will Break Your Legs
U.S. to International Criminal Court: We Will Break Your Legs
If the ICC begins and is allowed to investigate crimes against humanity committed by the West, the entire twisted concept of the U.S. and Europe being pioneers of freedom and democracy could easily and quickly collapse.
Well, not exactly like that, but in a way, yes. Now, finally, ‘the gloves are off’. The U.S. is openly threatening the historically timid ICC (International Criminal Court) and its judges. And unexpectedly, the ICC is hitting back. It refuses to shut up, to kneel, and to beg for mercy.
Suddenly, even the Western mass media outlets cannot conceal the aggressive mafia-style outbursts of the U.S. government officials. On March 15, Reuters reported:
“The United States will withdraw or deny visas to any International Criminal Court personnel investigating possible war crimes by U.S. forces or allies in Afghanistan, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Friday.
The court, which sits in The Hague, responded that it was an independent and impartial institution and would continue to do its work “undeterred” by Washington’s actions.
The Trump administration threatened in September to ban ICC judges and prosecutors from entering the United States and sanction funds they have there if the court launched a probe of war crimes in Afghanistan.
Washington took the first step on Friday with Pompeo’s announcement.
“I’m announcing a policy of U.S. visa restrictions on those individuals directly responsible for any ICC investigation of U.S. personnel,” Pompeo told a news conference in Washington.
“These visa restrictions may also be used to deter ICC efforts to pursue allied personnel, including Israelis, without allies’ consent.”
And so it goes… Mike Pompeo’s arrogant facial expression appeared above countless reports and it said it all: the world has to listen to the U.S. dictates, or else!
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Imperialist Aggression against Venezuela: Canada Tries to Use International Law to Justify Interventionism
Like the shopkeeper in the Monty Python dead parrot sketch who insists a deceased bird is actually alive, imperialist aggression against Venezuela is turned into promotion of the “international rules-based order”.
At the opening of the UN assembly in September Justin Trudeau said the International Criminal Court is a “useful and important way of promoting an international rules-based order.” Simultaneously, Canada announced it (with five South American nations) would ask the ICC to investigate the Venezuelan government, which is the first time a government has been formally brought before the tribunal by another member.
Liberal officials and the sycophantic media portrayed Canada’s move to bring Caracas before the ICC as a challenge to the US. Evan Dyer reported, “Government sources told CBC that Canada’s decision to refer Venezuela is also meant as a show of support for the ICC, an institution this country believes in that is under attack” from the Trump administration. In other words, Ottawa will challenge Washington by showing Trump how the “international rules-based” ICC can undermine a government the US and Canada are seeking to overthrow through unilateral sanctions, support for the opposition and threatening an invasion, which all contravene the UN Charter.
Unfortunately, some people are willing to buy a dead bird for a pet, the proof of which is that the “international rules-based” ICC Trudeau is promoting has previously been employed to enable violations of international law. In 2011 ICC chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo helped set the stage for NATO’s war on Libya, which contravened UN resolutions 1970 and 1973. (Ottawa defied the UN Security Council resolutions authorizing a no-fly zone to protect Libyan civilians by dispatching ground forces, delivering weaponry to the opposition and bombing in service of regime change.)
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
USA Declares it is not Subject to International Law
The United States is on a major confrontational course with the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. The White House National Security Adviser, John Bolton, threatened entry bans and other sanctions against court judges and prosecutors if they dare to try to prosecute any US citizens for an investigation into possible US war crimes in Afghanistan. Bolton made it very clear that the United States would NEVER cooperate with the Hague Tribunal and it regards the international court as an “illegitimate court” for the ICC is only good when it prosecutes non-Americans for war crimes.
Indeed, Bolton virtually declared war on the Hague and said that the United States and Israel, with other allied states, would put immigration bans and judges and prosecutors of the ICC, and it would also freeze any potential assets of Hague lawyers in the United States. Part of the issue is their interpretation is begin expanded as to what is a crime of aggression. According to the ICC, “crime of aggression” means the planning, preparation, initiation or execution of an offensive action that by its nature, severity and scope constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter of the United Nations by a person who is actually capable to control or direct the political or military action of a state. In other words, the USA could not invade Syria or Iraq for that matter. Any attack actually violates the prohibition of violence in Art. 2 No. 4 of the UN Charter, which is also a customary international norm. The generally accepted exceptions to the prohibition of violence are:
- Military coercive measures authorized by the UN Security Council pursuant to Art. 39, 42, 53 UN Charter
- Measures in the exercise of the right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter, which is also a norm of customary international law.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
