Tuesday, October 11, 2005

Countdown to International Justice (Day 195)

McQ over at QandO Blog reminds me of my Countdown to International Justice series, tracking the days until the United Nations and the long arm of the International Criminal Court brings swift justice to the victims of genocide in Sudan.

Well, now John Bolton is there and apparently already ruffling French feathers by blocking yet another U.N. envoy from briefing the Security Council on grave human rights violations in Sudan's Darfur region. McQ summarizes:

Well I have to agree with Bolton, how many briefings do you need to know a situation needs remedying? And I'd also point out that the UN determined some time ago that what was happening in Darfur wasn't "genocide". That saved them from having to act. So I'm not sure what the "advisor on genocide" would add to the body of information already available.

I agree. It's not like this stuff is new and we're just now figuring out what is going on. In fact, I'm surprised this is even an issue. After all, on June 06 of this year, 68 days after having the issue referred to the ICC by the United Nations, the Chief Prosecutor of the ICC finally decided that he would investigate the matter.

The Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), Luis Moreno-Ocampo, has decided to open an investigation into the situation in Darfur, Sudan.

Mike Hubbell, responding to my Day 31 post, asked what I thought the UN should be doing, rather than violating its own charter with feckless referrals to the completely useless ICC. I responded in the comments:

The UN should stick to its charter, which clearly defines its authority. In both the above mentioned resolutions, it is decided the situation in Darfur constitute a threat to international peace and security, meeting the obligation of Article 39 of Chapter VII. Articles 41 and 42 spell out exactly what measures the UN can take, and those measures include economic sanctions, blockades, and military intervention.

I'm glad John Bolton is taking a stance, and he is absolutely right to do so. After all, unlike France, the U.S. has been ready to call it genocide since the beginning of the year. It only makes sense that the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations would be working from that perspective.


Post a Comment

<< Home