Tuesday, 28 June 2011

How to get Gaddafi: Hire a Hollywood tough guy


Apparently the International Criminal Court (ICC) has just issued an arrest for warrant for Libya's bastard son, Muammar Gaddafi. Problem is, no one is brave enough to pass him the subpoena requesting that he get his genocidal arse to the Hague, pronto.

Like those TV party mommas who spoil their children with extravagant Sweet Sixteen's and plastic surgery, the ICC is mostly impotent in bringing down the hammer on Gaddafi (or gavel in this case). With a yearly budget of more then €101,000,000, you figure they'd be able to get something accomplished. But then again, in the words of Austin Power's father, Nigel:


You'd figure that in the very least the Americans would be able to do something about this. Coming off their win gunning down Osama Bin Laden, the US Navy Seals would be perfect candidates for this kind of nab mission. However, the US government and ICC haven't always had the warmest of relationships.

Despite having initially signed the Rome Statute (the treaty that established the ICC) back in the Clinton days, the whole arrangement has been a bit of a headache for the Americans.

George W's invasion of Iraq in 2003 created a sticky situation for US military personal and private contractors being subject to criminal charges, particularly with regards to the human rights violations at Abu Gharaib, the Blackwater contractor mass shootings, as well as an expired UN mandate (not to mention that pesky issue of an illegitimate and bogus premise for the 2003 Iraq debacle).

In response, the US opted out of the Rome Statute, and added the caveat that any country requesting US military aid do the same – which Israel in turn complied to.

Fears that the ICC would violate the US Constitution, override the Supreme Court or otherwise affect national interest and self-determination, were given as justification for unsigning from the treaty. The US Congress even went so far as to pass the American Servicemembers' Protection Act, also known as the “Hague Invasion Act”, permitting the President to authorize military force to free any U.S. military personnel held by the court.

But the US is not the only one unsubscribing to the ICC. India's objections to the court are notable, if not genuinely hilarious. Their tiff related to the hypocrisy of the Rome Statute signatories not including the use of Weapons of Mass Destruction under the category of war crimes and crimes against humanity. My guess is that someone in the room (ie: any country with nukes) didn't want to be held accountable for letting that genie out of the bottle.

China, quite obviously, isn't interested in subjecting itself to the scrutiny of the International Community either -- not that it has anything to hide on the humanitarian front. Along with Russia and the world's second most populous county, India, China's objections echoed America's -- with a particular fear of being judged for domestic human rights violations, as well as worries regarding “external” interference in internal political affairs.

And China's shunning of the ICC knows no lengths. A recent visit by Sudan's Omar al-Bashir (another ICC fugitive) showed just how far China is willing to go to thumb it's nose at the whole ICC idea. According to Al Jazeera: “Bashir is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for alleged genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity that occurred in Sudan's western Darfur region, where about 300,000 people have died since 2003.”

But it is also economically advantageous for China to play the bad guy. Western democracies have recently found it distasteful to buy crude oil from despots and tyrants, so Chinese access to Sudanese crude has never been greater.

But China isn't the only country that has embraced al-Bashir. Nigeria and Kenya (both a signatory of the ICC) and Egypt (not a signatory) have also welcomed al-Bashir post-warrant onto their soil, clearly mocking the authority of the court.

As a result of the ICC warrants against him, al-Bashir expelled several NGOs from Sudan, including Oxfam, claiming them to be “spies in the work of foreign regimes.” Interestingly, much has been written of the relationship between the NGOs (aid agencies, human rights organizations) and the ICC. The ICC relies on the information garnished by the NGOs intimate relationship with affected populations in order to produce evidence required for the prosecution of offending regimes.

Despite the Rome Statute being ratified by over 115 countries, the objections of only a half dozen (albeit populous and influential) countries have seemingly hindered the effectiveness of the ICC. There is no enforcement mechanism (ie: nab squad) and the ICC must therefore rely on a each member's national police force to arrest suspects. National or religious sympathies often stymie such apprehension efforts, as was the case with Radko Mladic, whose sixteen-year evasion made a mockery of international efforts.

The ICCs' predecessors -- the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the similarly named Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia -- demonstrate that these courts are somewhat effective. A recent string of convictions in the case of Rwanda demonstrate that while justice may be a long time coming (the tribunals were established around 1994), it does eventually come.

Problem is, most of these ICC “fujitives” were (or currently are) high ranking, influential and beloved leaders that are protected by their own populations. And it is silly to suggest that the current Sudanese and Libyan incumbents -- al-Bashir and Gaddafi -- will order their own arrests any time soon.

If anything, the warrants for these sitting heads of state will only help to further entrench their position. Aware that defeat will inevitably lead to a padded jail cell, they will likely grow even more ruthless and tyrannical in defense of their fiefdoms.

So that leaves us with one option: let's hire a hit team of washed up, Hollywood action stars to bring these ethnic-cleansing buggers to justice. With all their quasi-military training, chiseled features and overblown paychecks, I'm sure the likes of Steven Seagal, Chuck Norris and Sylvester Stallone could make this happen. Heck, even Arnie's currently looking for employment, right?

No comments:

Post a Comment