June 26, 2004

WSJ.com - Prosecuting Americans

Lacking the votes in the United Nations Security Council, the U.S. on Wednesday withdrew a resolution seeking another one-year exemption from prosecution at the International Criminal Court for American soldiers participating in U.N. peacekeeping missions. This humiliation comes despite flexibility from Washington, which gave an undertaking that this third exemption would be the last. And it follows the abandonment two years ago of a resolution seeking a permanent exemption.
[Hurry yet again for President Bush!
We don't want our troops under the aegis of the UN anymore.--Jen]

From the way supporters of the ICC keep pressing for leave to prosecute Americans, one would think that the U.S. was the foremost abuser of human rights in the world today.
[Whereas the truth of the matter is that the U.S. is the world's primary protector and guarantor of human rights! Outrageous.]
This hardly bodes well for the fairness of future prosecutions. Rather, every indication so far is that the U.N. is cementing its role as a forum for scoring political points against the Americans.

There can be little doubt that the American military justice system and legislative oversight will make sure that those responsible for the Abu Ghraib prison abuse are exposed and punished. But that didn't stop U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan from using the scandal to torpedo the exemption resolution.
[How long, oh Lord, are we going to have to put with Kofi Annan and his posturing on behalf of the world's bullies?]
Since neither the U.S. nor Iraq has ratified the treaty setting up the court, the events at the prison could never form the basis for an ICC prosecution. Nevertheless, Mr. Annan counseled, "I think in this circumstance it would be unwise to press for an exemption, and it would be even more unwise on the part of the Security Council to grant it."
[B*stard!]

It's only prudent that a commander-in-chief would want to protect his men and women before sending them into the world's hotspots where anyone trying to keep feuding parties apart runs the risk of being accused by one side. Moreover, the U.S. has a legitimate point that never before have non-signatories been bound by a treaty they didn't sign, an innovation that represents a significant intrusion on national sovereignty.

Mr. Annan's cheap political point-scoring only further undermines the legitimacy of the U.N. Given this attitude, it would be hard to justify U.S. participation in future U.N. peacekeeping missions. The Secretary-General holds himself up as a champion of the rule of law, but his actions imperil the cause of justice.

I don't think we would have gotten the immunity even without Kofi's tacky remarks, but they certainly didn't help.
(How I wish VP Cheney could tell him off the way he did Leahy and then revoke his diplo visa and kick him out of our country!)
This is a very good thing and I think that the Bush Administration has rope-a-doped another of its enemies once again.
We don't want our soldiers in UN blue helmets, thank you!
Maybe if we're lucky, we'll get to pull out of the whole Bosnian mess and let EUrope clean up it's own eastern back yard.
IMO, the UN aspect was one of the biggest reasons our involvement in Somalia was such a fiasco and exacerbated the "Black Hawk Down" incident:
while our soldiers were supposed to be there to get food to the hungry, they ended up nabbing warlords, too, and got into an ambush (armed and prepared by Osama and Al Queda).
They weren't fully equipped and ready for battle because they were supposed to be "peacekeepers."
And because it was a UN force, the Pakistanis wouldn't budge out of the Mogadishu stadium and come rescue them in a timely fashion.
I know most of my fellow Americans don't need any explanation and know that the UN is worthless and irrelevant, but in case any Lefties are reading this, it will make our position clearer.
President Bush has already negotiated bilateral agreements with every nation in the free world and has reaffirmed our national committments in organizations like NATO and the OAS, so we don't need no steenkin' UN!
And while Kofi may feel pretty smug about this right now, that Oil-for-Food (which should be called "Blood for Oil") scandal isn't going away any time soon as both Paul Volcker, Norm Coleman's Senate Subcommittee, the U.S. Attorney's and the Manhattan Attorney's office all move on getting to the bottom of this $5 billion + massive scandal.
Let's see how quick the UN is from now on to "commit peacekeeping troops" to every little 3rd world problem area now that we, the yeoman of that guard, aren't going to be participating!