War Crimes and the United States

The media today is reporting Angelina Jolie's presence at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague watching the trial of Congolese warlord, Thomas Lubanga, who is charged with using child soldiers.

A few comments following these reports question why African warlords are being brought to justice but not potential war criminals in the United States. The answer for this is simple, the United States has not ratified the Rome Statute which would necessitate full cooperation with the proceedings of the court including the arrest and surrender of suspects. The United States did sign the treaty which signifies that a commitment to refrain from such acts as fall under the aims of the treaty but in no way obliges complete cooperation. This is emphasized further by two facts: (1) the United States government has always been very clear that it's signature is/was not a prelude to ratification, & (2) in 2002, America [and Israel] 'unsigned' the treaty.

There are few indications that Barack Obama will switch the position taken by previous administrations in this matter. His response to questions on the ICC are typically vague and emphasize the importance of national security and sovereignty, indicating that the current structure and policies of the court do not guarantee these two factors. He does acknowledge the importance of the court unlike the Bush administration, where there was a concerted effort to argue against the court's position and authority. While some of these arguments have merit and raise important questions regarding the court's structure and its jurisdiction, many were influenced by the isolationist tendencies of the American government. The significance of the United States in international politics and the continuing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan emphasizes the need for the current administration to engage in dialogue with the goal of ratifying the treaty and signalling a more meaningful cooperation with the UN and its various bodies.