Pressure Groups Threaten NATO With Kosovo War Crimes Investigation

By Austin Ruse

     (NEW YORK – C-FAM) Recent actions by radical NGOs and the Yugoslav War Crimes Tribunal have cast a shadow over the newest round of International Criminal Court (ICC) negotiations that began this week in the Sicilian seaside town of Siracusa. While the concept of a permanent war crimes tribunal was agreed to in Rome almost two years ago, governmental negotiators have been working against a Spring 2000 deadline to complete the details of how the court will actually work. Siracusa is the latest installment of this process.

     The US government is not expected to ratify the ICC, because even the liberals in the Clinton Administration have been reluctant to place American soldiers under the criminal scrutiny of bodies outside the US. That the US is not expected to ratify it casts doubt upon the ability of the ICC to operate effectively when it becomes operational.

     A recent investigation of NATO and American soldiers by prosecutors of the ongoing Yugoslavian war crimes tribunal in The Hague, has deepened American suspicions toward the ICC. With very little fanfare, last fall Canadian NGOs pushed Tribunal prosecutors to investigate possible war crimes committed by NATO and American soldiers during the bombing of Serbia and Kosovo last year.

     Canadian NGOs charged that NATO conducted "a coward's war," that was nothing short of "all out total war" and "a terrorist war against the Yugoslav people." Kenneth Roth, the executive director of Human Rights Watch, specifically cites NATO's use of cluster bombs, and also the deliberate targeting of facilities used by civilians. Though an investigation was carried out, Tribunal prosecutor Carla Del Ponte said there was "no formal inquiry into the actions of NATO during the conflict in Kosovo."

     The workings of the two ongoing but temporary war crime tribunals in Yugoslavia and Rwanda provide a glimpse into the workings of what will be a permanent ICC. One of the many worries of conservative critics of the ICC is the role of NGOs. NGOs are groups of un-elected activists who are accountable to no one, but that increasingly drive public policy. The current ICC document is expected to allow these unaccountable NGOs to act as official partners in ICC prosecutions.

     Pro-life lobbyists are in Siracusa this week as they remain concerned that abortion will creep into the document under the guise of the term "forced pregnancy." Radical feminists insist "forced pregnancy" means repeated rape for the purposes of impregnation in order to change the ethnic composition of an enemy people. Pro-life lawyers discovered that radical feminists used the term in a Utah court case in which "forced pregnancy" meant that a woman couldn't get an abortion. "Forced pregnancy" remains in the ICC document.

     The ICC will come into existence once 60 nations have ratified it. Although 92 countries have signed the ICC statutes, so far only five tiny nations, along with Italy, have ratified the as yet unfinished document. An aggressive campaign for ratification was begun by western nations and radical NGOs last summer. Sixty ratifications are expected within three years.

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter