Chris Burford
At 11/07/02 11:36 -0400, you wrote:
>U.S. Backs Off Court Immunity Demand
>Thu Jul 11, 8:38 AM ET
>By EDITH M. LEDERER, Associated Press Writer
>
>UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Facing worldwide opposition, the United States has
>retreated from its demand that American peacekeepers be permanently immune
>from the new war crimes tribunal. U.S. diplomats are instead proposing a
>yearlong ban on any investigation.
>
>The compromise proposal made Wednesday marked a significant change in the
>Bush administration's campaign to shield Americans from frivolous or
>politically motivated prosecutions by the new International Criminal Court.
>
>Members of the U.N. Security Council have been grappling with a U.S.
>threat to end U.N. peacekeeping operations, beginning with Bosnia's on
>July 15, if it didn't get blanket immunity. They said the latest U.S.
>proposal was still unsatisfactory.
>
>Nonetheless, there was widespread relief at Washington's new willingness
>to negotiate.
>
>"We have all very much welcomed the constructive approach of the U.S. at
>least to work with the other members," said Mauritius' U.N. Ambassador
>Jagdish Koonjul.
>
>Britain's U.N. Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock, the current council
>president, called the U.S. proposal "a fair basis for discussion" and said
>consultations would continue behind closed doors on Thursday.
>
>U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte introduced the new draft at the end of a
>daylong open council meeting, at which the United States faced intense
>criticism from nearly 40 countries for seeking permanent immunity for
>American peacekeepers. Only India, which also opposes the court, was
>somewhat sympathetic to the U.S. position.
>
>Canada's U.N. Ambassador Paul Heinbecker, who requested the open meeting,
>warned that the United States was jeopardizing the credibility of the
>Security Council, the legality of international treaties, and the
>principle that all people are equal and accountable before the law.
>
>The court's supporters accused Washington of threatening peace and
>stability from the Balkans and East Timor ( news - web sites) to the
>Mideast and Africa — places where U.N. peacekeepers operate.
>
>The court is the product of a long campaign to create a permanent tribunal
>to prosecute the most heinous deeds: war crimes, genocide, and crimes
>against humanity.
>
>It came into existence on July 1 with ratifications from 76 countries and
>signatures from 139.
>
>The United States objects to the idea that Americans could be subject to
>the court's jurisdiction — even if the United States is not a party.
>Washington says other countries could use this to try American soldiers
>for war crimes, in effect threatening U.S. sovereignty.
>
>The new U.S. proposal would ban for 12 months "any investigations or
>prosecutions" of participants in U.N.-sanctioned peacekeeping operations
>from countries like the United States that have not ratified the Rome
>treaty formalizing the court. It also "expresses the intention to renew
>the request ... for further 12-month periods for as long as may be necessary."
>
>Under the proposal, any peacekeeper who was exempt from investigation or
>prosecution for a year could be prosecuted if the exemption was not
>renewed — though no U.N. peacekeeper has ever been charged with a war crime.
>
>"We have for one year a total freedom," said Richard Grenell, spokesman
>for the U.S. Mission, who said this was sufficient time to bring any
>American suspect home, thus out of reach of the court.
>
>"What we have been focused on is ensuring that American men and women are
>not within the reach of the International Criminal Court," he said. "What
>we have been able to offer today ... (is) that for a period of 12 months
>they would have that immunity."
>
>But the U.S. draft still raises serious questions for some council members.
>
>The Rome treaty already allows the Security Council to request a 12-month
>deferral of investigation or prosecution by the court on a case-by-case basis.
>
>Some council members — including France, which has veto power — argued
>that the U.S. draft would change the statute's intent by giving blanket
>deferral to peacekeepers. Colombia's U.N. Ambassador Alfonso Valdivieso,
>also a council member, called the U.S. draft "an improvement" because it
>was not "in perpetuity."
>
>At the open meeting, nations from the European Union, Latin America,
>Africa and Asia argued that the Rome treaty has sufficient safeguards to
>prevent political prosecutions. First and foremost, the court will step in
>only when states are unwilling or unable to dispense justice.
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
>