America, Afghanistan and war crimes
President Obama tonight will make his case to the American people, two days after ordering what amounts to a surge in Afghanistan. At least 30,000 additional soldiers will be headed to a country where we have already fought for eight years. Casualties have risen lately, and the chances of success seemingly dimmed. I’ll reserve judgment on the president’s plan until I’ve heard what he has to say tonight.
There is one angle to our presence in Afghanistan, however, that has gotten much less attention than it deserves. The chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court said in a recent interview that, even though the U.S. is not a participant in the ICC, he has jurisdiction over U.S. soldiers there because Afghanistan is a signatory to the court’s founding treaty.
Here’s what Luis Moreno Ocampo, the ICC prosecutor, had to say to The Wall Street Journal’s Daniel Schwammenthal:
“We have to check if crimes against humanity, war crimes or genocide have been committed in Afghanistan,” Mr. Ocampo told me. “There are serious allegations against the Taliban and al Qaeda and serious allegations about warlords, even against some who are connected with members of the government.” Taking up his inquiry of Allied soldiers, he added, “there are different reports about problems with bombings and there are also allegations about torture.”
It was clear who the targets of these particular inquiries are but the chief prosecutor shied away from spelling it out.
Asked repeatedly whether the examination of bombings and torture allegations refers to NATO and U.S. soldiers, Mr. Ocampo finally stated that “we are investigating whoever commits war crimes, including the group you mentioned.”
The U.S. has so far chosen not to participate in the ICC exactly because of potential situations like this one, in which American soldiers carrying out a mission condoned both by the United Nations and by NATO could nonetheless be prosecuted. There is no moral equivalence between what our soldiers have done and the genocides carried out in Darfur, to name one place. Yet this court, which has not been sanctioned by our own government and over which Americans have no say, apparently sees fit to assert its authority over us — and, by extension, over our foreign policy.
Lest anyone think this is only about instances of torture conducted under an evil Bush administration, Ocampo hinted that even the bombings by unmanned drones could constitute ICC-illegal acts. Schwammenthal writes that Ocampo said of these Predator strikes “Mr. Ocampo chuckled and answered evasively. ‘We have people around the world concerned about this,’ he said, and when pressed, added, ‘Whatever the gravest war crimes are that have been committed, we have to check.’ ”
A court is part of a government, and a government derives its legitimacy only through consent of the governed. No such consent exists here.
When the president commits more of our troops to a war, it better happen with the understanding that he is not also putting them at risk of possible prosecution by this illegitimate court.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2010 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
35 comments Add your comment
Churchill's MOM
December 1st, 2009
1:36 pm
This war has lots of down side and little up side, I sure hope our President is doing the wright thing.
Horrible Horace
December 1st, 2009
1:53 pm
Damn the ICC, the EU and the UN. I would rather try to befriend a rattlesnake than this nest of crooks.
Hillbilly Deluxe
December 1st, 2009
1:59 pm
Nobody should have jurisdiction or command over our soldiers but us.
jconservative
December 1st, 2009
2:10 pm
The ICC is not a problem. As Jackson said, “he made his decision, now let him enforce it”.
Yeah, we are sending 30,000 additional US soldiers on top of the 22,000 Obama sent in March. This fact alone makes it Obama’s war.
And, Kyle, your comment that Afghanistan is “…a country where we have already fought for eight years…” raises another question. Why, after the mission failed, did Bush keep US troops there for another 7 years?
That is the biggest mystery. I have heard numerous reason why we kept the troops in Afghanistan, but none of them add up.
But, as always, I will listen tonight with an open mind & talk with you tomorrow.
Davo
December 1st, 2009
2:23 pm
This war is immoral, and by extension, Obama is as well for prolonging it. There is no more vengence to be had, territory to be gained or resources to be plundered. The Dems will see it differently, I suppose, saying that we have to finish the job of….what? Pacifying the country, routing out terrorists, democracy? The Reps will want more cannon-fodder simply to make a talking point about how Obama is ‘weak on defense’; blood -lust being a new American value for them.
End this war.
David Axelfraud
December 1st, 2009
2:24 pm
Churchill’s MOM, you have a lot of nerve talking about doing the right thing when you yourself have done nothing but name call and accuse others of lying.
Bottom line: Produce that evidence you claim to have about a law degree.
David Axelfraud
December 1st, 2009
2:25 pm
President Acorn should be tried for treason in his continuation for selling this country out and destroying the economy.
Jefferson
December 1st, 2009
2:32 pm
DA’s name calling renders him no respect and a waste of bandwidth. Grow up, call people by their real name and you might be taken serious. Know it all.
jconservative
December 1st, 2009
2:33 pm
David Axelfraud
“President Acorn should be tried for treason in his continuation for selling this country out and destroying the economy.”
That would be impreachment by the House & a trial by the Senate.
Since it starts in the House, you can reach your congressman here:
http://www.congress.org/ –
just enter your zip code & go. Good luck.
David Axelfraud
December 1st, 2009
2:34 pm
Jefferson, you mean like ChurchillsMOM?
Hypocrite much?
David Axelfraud
December 1st, 2009
2:40 pm
jconservative, I was acting like Democrats did for 8 years. I don’t really mean that. Just wanted to give them a taste of their own whining.
Chris Broe
December 1st, 2009
2:47 pm
“The U.S. has so far chosen not to participate in the ICC exactly because of potential situations like this one, in which American soldiers carrying out a mission condoned both by the United Nations and by NATO could nonetheless be prosecuted.”
That sentence was just a little redundant and awkward. Try this: “The U.S. does not recognize the ICC because our soldiers should be free to follow orders without weighing the legal consequences of collateral damage.”
or better: “Our strategic interests dont need no stinking stamps of approval.”
best: “ICC, say hello to my leetle friend”.
Winner: “I got your war crimes. RIGHT HERE!”
Davo
December 1st, 2009
2:58 pm
Official: Obama announcing that US forces will start leaving Afghanistan in July 2011
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/official-obama-announcing-that-221161.html
A fine example of how Obama thinks he can have it both ways, as usual. So there’s your speech tonight folks “We will be sending more troops to Afghanistan in order to begin our withdrawl.” You just can’t make this stuff up.
David Axelfraud
December 1st, 2009
3:36 pm
Partisan Trends
Number of Democrats Falls to Four-Year Low
The number of Americans identifying themselves as Democrats fell by nearly two percentage points in November. Added to declines earlier in the year, the number of Democrats in the nation has fallen by five percentage points during 2009.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/partisan_trends
Mutts R Stupid
December 1st, 2009
3:39 pm
Obama will soon be less popular than Jimmy Carter at the end of his worthless single 4 year term. There is absolutely nothing to be gained in Afghanistan, and every thing to lose. Only a fool would double down as the, – I really hate to say this, seeing as how I voted for him and sent him some of my money- Idiot in Chief is about to do. President Obama should order a Withdrawal of all troops now, and point to the Bush/Rumsfeld failure at Toro Bora as the reason Osama is still free and alive. Of course we will keep hunting him and his organization by all means possible, but not this stupid war of occupation way.
dewstarpath
December 1st, 2009
3:39 pm
- I first read about this on the “Opinion” page of Friday’s
(after Thanksgiving) edition of the Wall Street Journal.
The prosecution of Predator pilots for war crimes is unlikely.
Since they are halfway around the world with all of the
resources that entails, I don’t see how that could be construed
as a “crime”. It would be like prosecuting the officer that
turns a launch key for a Standard-1 or -2 or cruise missile.
Also, the often-grainy videos don’t offer the pilots the clearest
view of the battlefield – the “fog of war” could be used as a defense.
Mutts R Stupid
December 1st, 2009
3:42 pm
I support the ICC, it keeps the CIA and Pentagon psychopaths a little sane and under control if they know someone is watching who can hurt them personally.
Chris Broe
December 1st, 2009
3:46 pm
History of the death of conservatism: We had an urgent mission in Afghanistan in the 90 days after 911: Capture and destroy Al Queda. We had them surrounded thanks to amazing work by our CIA. We had enough personel within striking distance to destroy the conspirators of 911. Bush gave the order to attack. Those were heady days for this country.
No attack was made. We invaded Iraq a year later. Eight years later, Conservatism is dead.
It was conservatism’s corrupt self interests which led to it’s own demise. Oh, the greed. Imagine how Cheney licked his chops. Cheney fashioned a retirement parachute out of our flag: Despicable. I wonder how many thousands of years you have to go back to find a weasel as evil as Dick Cheney. And all for a little bit of money.
Well, there’s more to life than a little bit of money.
dewstarpath
December 1st, 2009
3:51 pm
- Another thing is that the US military has been carrying
out war tribunals for months. A lot of these have been
conducted at Camp Pendleton, without the assistance of
the ICC.
David Axelfraud
December 1st, 2009
3:55 pm
The plot thickens………
Penn State Will Investigate ‘Climategate’
Among other things, the Watergate scandal of the 1970s gave us a great naming convention for future scandals. Take “Climategate” at Penn State. That’s what people are calling the controversy surrounding leaked E-mails among climate change researchers that climate change opponents say expose the researchers’ falsification of data. One Penn State professor is involved in the scandal.
The Penn State administration plans to investigate Climategate and determine if it needs to take further action, the Daily Collegian reports. A little more than a week ago, E-mails exchanged among an English university’s climate change researchers were illegally obtained from a server and posted online, the report says.
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/paper-trail/2009/11/30/penn-state-will-investigate-climategate.html
Joan
December 1st, 2009
4:29 pm
I thought Clinton was bad because he diddled a kid in the Oval Office, but I am beginning to think that this country would be a lot safer if Obama just stayed home and diddled someone in his office, than go out and do all of the things he is doing, like all his bowing, scraping, making excuses for a great country, selling our troops down the river, reneging on everything he ever told anyone. This guy is a nightmare.
David Axelfraud
December 1st, 2009
4:40 pm
Joan, yeah at least Clinton actually lead the country every once in a while. President Acorn is still campaigning against a two-term president who is laughing at him from Crawford.
Robert
December 1st, 2009
4:49 pm
The problem with this country, and particularly the democrats, is the flash-in-the-pan, short-term thinking. Do they not realize that if we do not succeed in this war, then the Taliban will be back, along with their friends Al Queda…to plot against our country and our allies? We need to finish what we started, not give the enemy our gameplans (i.e., timeline for withdrawal) and hopefully won’t have to worry about this mess 10 years from now. Sure, the easy answer is to withdraw now. It would make alot of people happy…happy until we are attacked again. They also want to rush a horrible health care bill through in order to say that we have health care for everyone (is it really going to help everyone?) only to burden the next few generations with paying back the debt?
Linda
December 1st, 2009
5:22 pm
George Bush’s middle name started with a W. For that reason & that reason alone, Obama does not use words that begin with a W. During his speech tonight, see if he uses the word “win.”
Peter
December 1st, 2009
6:05 pm
I would suggest watching Charlie Wilson’s War, and excellent movie, and and the beginning of our troubles in that country.
Linda
December 1st, 2009
6:32 pm
The radical Islamic terrorists have been attacking Americans for 30 yrs. in Asia, Europe & the US, in our embassies & consulates, military installations, tourist sites, on commercial airlines & cruise ships, hotels, a hospital, a train station, a cinema, restaurants, a disco, a Navy destroyer & our Pentagon. We knew they wanted to blow up the World Trade Center because they had already tried in 1993. They murder innocent civilians anywhere we go.
I have always thought one the safest places in the world was on a military installation on American soil. That is no longer true.
If “strangers” can gain easy access to the White House, terrorists can gain easy access across our borders to our country. As long as our borders are not secure, we are at risk. There’s terrorist cells all over the US.
For 25 yrs., we tried to appease terrorists & those harboring them. Appeasement has never worked. After 9/11, the vote in the Senate was 98-0 & in the House 420 -1 to go to war in Afghanistan. It was time to finally aggressively go after the terrorists on their soil. Since we went after the terrorists in Afghanistan, we have been safe at home & safer elsewhere.
There was a report this week that bin Laden was within reach of US troops in 12/01. I thought it was interesting that this came out one day before the president’s announcement to send more troops & the fact that it was prepared by STAFF MEMBERS for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at the request of the chairman, Sen. John Kerry. It outraged many people, as it was intended to do.
Radical Islamic terrorists hate us for who we ARE, not for anything we have DONE.
We are a peace-loving nation. Just because we don’t like war is no reason to bring the troops home.
If we abruptly withdraw, we break our word with the Afghanistan people, the Taliban & al Quida will pick up where they left off, plotting against Americans with even more determination & attack us for another 30 years—& we look like fruitcake to the world. The terrorists are after Pakistan’s nuclear weapons & were within a few miles of the capital a few mts. ago. Those who have died would have died in vain.
The members of our military are volunteers. They want to WIN! They don’t want to come home in shame & be treated like our Vietnam veterans were.
The war in Afghanistan is THE war on terrorism. We will either win or loose.
Pray for our troops every day.
David Axelfraud
December 1st, 2009
6:34 pm
Peter, I would suggest living in the real world and not watching fictional movies with Tom Hanks. Try reading Reagan books and what HE actually did to stop communism.
Peter
December 1st, 2009
8:06 pm
David did you see the movie ? based on facts…….
Gosh you never ever have anything positive or insightful to say……..
What happens at the end of the movie is the beginning of our problem there……… did you get it ?
Linda has a point David……..listen to her about Afghanistan !
Reagan HA HA HA…….he built up the war machine…….then forgot what he was doing.
Hey…. but at least he was the first US president that could be called a Drug Lord !
David Axelfraud
December 1st, 2009
8:38 pm
Peter, I bet you think the DaVinci code was based on facts. But but…Tom Hanks says Jesus had kids so it must be true!!! LOLOL
dewstarpath
December 1st, 2009
9:24 pm
- I can’t figure why some people would think that
the movie “Charlie Wilson’s War” was fictional. Granted,
the lead actors and actresses don’t bear any resemblance
to the actual players, but it wasn’t long ago that the “60 Minutes”
piece that the movie is partially based on aired.
Peter
December 1st, 2009
9:33 pm
David…have you seen the movie, or read about it at all ?
David Axelfraud
December 1st, 2009
10:13 pm
Peter, yes I saw the movie. It was full of flaws. But then again, you believe that every movie is real.
David Axelfraud
December 1st, 2009
10:18 pm
Obama Approval on Afghanistan, at 35%, Trails Other Issues
Decline from 49% in September far exceeds that for other issues and for approval more broadly
PRINCETON, NJ — Americans are far less approving of President Obama’s handling of the situation in Afghanistan than they have been in recent months, with 35% currently approving, down from 49% in September and 56% in July.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/124520/Obama-Approval-Afghanistan-Trails-Issues.aspx
Weeraya
December 5th, 2009
11:51 pm
USA is a hypocrite! Giving lectures to Sri Lanka after we killed LTTE terrorists and trying to show that is a war crime! USA must be charged for all war crimes in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam etc!
Weeraya
December 5th, 2009
11:52 pm
USA must be charged for all crimes against humanity! They have commited plenty of atrocities in Iraq, Vietnam and Afghanistan!