Solution far away as court planners disagree

With three days to go before the deadline for agreement on the proposed International Criminal Court, the debate has become focused…

With three days to go before the deadline for agreement on the proposed International Criminal Court, the debate has become focused on how to get as broad a consensus as possible by shielding the largest number of states from provisions they dislike.

Naked, cynical self-interest is as blatantly visible as at any international forum in recent memory.

The US is afraid of a court that could level charges at its soldiers abroad. China is afraid of a court with the power to judge its repression in Tibet. Other states fear the impact of clauses on a range of issues from the use of inhuman weapons to the eradication of ethnic minorities. And as the clock ticks towards midnight on Friday, they are having less and less difficulty expressing those fears in plain, simple language.

The US is reported to be using unusually strong pressure, threatening to withdraw its troop presence in Germany if it does not get its way, according to notes of points made by the US Defence Secretary, Mr William Cohen, which were seen by a Reuters correspondent. Washington's main concern, Mr Cohen said, was that its soldiers might become a magnet for frivolous and politically-motivated charges.

READ MORE

The draft treaty submitted last Friday by the conference chairman, Mr Philippe Kirsch of Canada, has alarmed not only pressure groups like Amnesty but also many of the delegates. In particular, it left in as one of two options a US proposal that would allow the court to try war crimes "only when committed as part of a plan or policy".