I’m normally a fan of the International Criminal Court and I am so infuriated at the genocide in Darfur that I’ve been supporting an armed peacekeeping force since forever.
But the ICC’s decision to prosecute Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir at this particular timing is just very, very dumb. The ICC’s prosecutor, an overzealous Argentinean who still thinks he’s dealing with gangs in the suburbs of Buenos Aires, has probably made things worse.
First, because while there’s very little chance there’ll any arrest made in this case - it’ll be several months until an arrest warrant is issued by the ICC judges panel (if ever) and I doubt Bashir will happily hop on the first flight to the Hague to see what those nice ICC people want to tell him - this is bound to make Khartoum very, very nervous. And nervous people with guns don’t take intelligent decisions. Appeasing will make them seem like they’re afraid - which they very well might be but won’t admit.
The Darfur rebels and various armed groups, however, are surely going to be emboldened, which will in no possible way get them to compromise. This prosecution will make them feel vindicated and they will increase their attacks on the Government forces and, more importantly, Arab villages. And that’s not very conducive to peace either.
Third, with the North-South peace treaty (the CPA, Comprehensive Peace Agreement) at its most fragile, this will embolden the Southerners and the clique of terrorists at its top to seek further concessions from the Government, after which they will surely seek independence with even worse agreement terms then those in the CPA - with the support of several western countries who will push the boot further on Khartoum’s neck with the distant carrot that the prosecution will be.. alleviated - which will be incredibly damaging for the Sudan, severing the Sudanese from their main sources and income and pushing them further into poverty.
And maybe even making the Government angrier - and more violent in Darfur.
For the ICC to hide behind its mandate of being ‘non-political’ and for the prosecutor to claim that he’s only interested in Justice, not Diplomacy - is complete, complete bullshit. That’s just playing dumb.
I do believe that the Government of Khartoum has blood on its hands. But that decision, which I believe to be mainly motivated by pro-southern Sudan powers, will undoubtedly lead to a worsening of the situation in the country.
Bravo.
Mini-update: the UN is withdrawing all non-essential staff from Darfur because they fear for their safety after the decision to prosecute. Yes, this decision is surely helping the Darfuris.
But the ICC’s decision to prosecute Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir at this particular timing is just very, very dumb. The ICC’s prosecutor, an overzealous Argentinean who still thinks he’s dealing with gangs in the suburbs of Buenos Aires, has probably made things worse.First, because while there’s very little chance there’ll any arrest made in this case - it’ll be several months until an arrest warrant is issued by the ICC judges panel (if ever) and I doubt Bashir will happily hop on the first flight to the Hague to see what those nice ICC people want to tell him - this is bound to make Khartoum very, very nervous. And nervous people with guns don’t take intelligent decisions. Appeasing will make them seem like they’re afraid - which they very well might be but won’t admit.
The Darfur rebels and various armed groups, however, are surely going to be emboldened, which will in no possible way get them to compromise. This prosecution will make them feel vindicated and they will increase their attacks on the Government forces and, more importantly, Arab villages. And that’s not very conducive to peace either.
Third, with the North-South peace treaty (the CPA, Comprehensive Peace Agreement) at its most fragile, this will embolden the Southerners and the clique of terrorists at its top to seek further concessions from the Government, after which they will surely seek independence with even worse agreement terms then those in the CPA - with the support of several western countries who will push the boot further on Khartoum’s neck with the distant carrot that the prosecution will be.. alleviated - which will be incredibly damaging for the Sudan, severing the Sudanese from their main sources and income and pushing them further into poverty.
And maybe even making the Government angrier - and more violent in Darfur.
For the ICC to hide behind its mandate of being ‘non-political’ and for the prosecutor to claim that he’s only interested in Justice, not Diplomacy - is complete, complete bullshit. That’s just playing dumb.
I do believe that the Government of Khartoum has blood on its hands. But that decision, which I believe to be mainly motivated by pro-southern Sudan powers, will undoubtedly lead to a worsening of the situation in the country.
Bravo.
Mini-update: the UN is withdrawing all non-essential staff from Darfur because they fear for their safety after the decision to prosecute. Yes, this decision is surely helping the Darfuris.
3 comments:
Thankyou for a very intelligent post-I sure as hell couldn't be bothered to write one. And just because Bashir deserves to get his ass kicked doesn't mean we can jeopardize an already volatile situation and the safety of even more people.
interesting post.
i can't say i'm as clued up as you are on these matters, but i'd like to share some questions you raised in my mind. i think it is good, in an ethical and ideal sense, for a body such as the ICC to act in principle. i do not see why you think this is complete, complete bullshit. that it's course of action may have political repercussions should not, for a court of justice, have any bearing on the outcome of their decision. from the political angle, this also sends a message to nearby dictatorships. keeps them in line a bit, don't you think? for example, i thought the 2005 contested presidential election in egypt quite a tragically clownish attempt by mubarak to dance to the tune played by the u.s. still, it was progress! also, i find it intriguing that institutions such as the ICC are unheard of in the developing world.
Zeinab -- I agree. Thanks!
Ramy -- look, i believe the ICC is a great idea and I've supported it ever since the Rome Statute was agreed in 1997, and I'm not reneging on that support.
to explain why i think this decision was wrong, let me tell you about a more successful case: Charles Taylor, President of Liberia.
As the civil war in Liberia was reaching its end and the warring parties were putting the final touch to a peace agreement, Taylor was indicted for war crimes -- in neighbouring Sierra Leone, where he was accused of fueling the insurgency. He is in custody as we speak.
Now they didn't try to arrest him in the middle of conflict, for the alternative remained unclear. And when he was to exit the country, there was a mechanism in place, there were ECOWAS and US peacekeeping troops deploying, etc.
Sudan is drastically different. It is in the middle of a war, and the south-north conflict is anything but over. Decapitating the snake, to paraphrase the lingo of 2003 Iraq, will leave the rest of the body in violent convulsions that will surely devolve in violence, more killing, and the assured explosion of the State.
Which, i suspect, is what some people outside the Sudan want to see happen.
The ICC is not a regular court of justice. It's not hunting down serial killers or bank robbers: it targets heads of state, sovereign armies, etc - people responsible for war crimes. It cannot, just cannot, pretend that it does not care about political repercussions.
Post a Comment