
US Bars Entry to International Criminal Court Investigators - tareqak
https://apnews.com/08e538e370914f6e8243e237dbde50b5
======
rchaud
The Secretary of State sees fit to make a public announcement about how ICC
investigators won't be granted US visas, but when a Saudi national commits a
fatal hit-and-run on US soil, he can be flown out by his government under the
cover of night, no problem [1]. Here's what the attorney for the family of the
victim said:

"While we appreciate Secretary Pompeo's condolences, what we need is a
commitment by this administration to act: to negotiate with the King of Saudi
Arabia for the return of Mr Noorah. We understand that while 'the law
enforcement options are limited', the Department of State options are not so
limited."

It is beyond parody that a government undertaking multiple military campaigns
abroad, including helping Saudi Arabia foment a humanitarian crisis in Yemen,
is claiming to be powerless to act because Saudi Arabia doesn't have a
bilateral extradition treaty with the US. As if there aren't billions in arms
deals and military aid that the US could use as leverage if they wanted to.

Pompeo clearly has far bigger priorities. Like making sure ICC investigators
looking into Israel's settlements also can't set foot in the US either.

[1][https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-
canada-47377888](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47377888)

~~~
mcv
I think the US makes its stance abundantly clear: it's fine with crimes
committed by governments, government officials, or in the name of a
government. It's not fine with persecuting those crimes.

There's honestly no other way to read this as far as I can tell.

------
dmix
I was just reading about this guy today who was a German citizen who was
kidnapped from Macedonia and sent to a blacksite in Afghanistan and tortured
for months:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_El-
Masri](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_El-Masri)

Why? His name was one-letter away from another suspect:

    
    
        Khalid El-Masri
        Khalid Al-Masri [1]
    

And the famous female CIA "queen of torture" decided on a hunch he could be
the same guy, apparently against the wishes of her subordinates, and had him
kidnapped.

I'm not a fan of ICC as a solution to this problem. But it's interesting that
the people behind very obvious torture/kidnapping are going unpunished.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_al-
Masri](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_al-Masri)

~~~
Tomte
A really tragic case.

The CIA dropped him, dirty and in ragged clothes, on some country road in
Albania. Where he was detained again, because he looked like a terrorist. (!)

He's obviously broken. After returning to Germany he committed violent crimes
and was sentenced to prison.

No idea why the court did not send him to a psychiatric clinic.

~~~
detaro
And it's quite unsatisfying that the questions about what the German
government knew when and did about it never got useful answers or
consequences.

~~~
dmix
Or Macedonia.

Which may be an equally a relevant point to this topic.

------
xster
For what it's worth, Chomsky has been saying "If the Nuremberg laws were
applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged." since
the 90s.

[https://chomsky.info/1990____-2/](https://chomsky.info/1990____-2/)

~~~
benj111
To be fair, I think a similar point was made about the Allies at the time.

History, and laws are written by the victors it seems.

~~~
soperj
Allies bombed the shit out of citizens(Hamburg, Dresden, Tokyo, not to mention
Hiroshima/Nagasaki). I don't think there's any debate that war crimes were
committed there.

~~~
xster
I mean forget the bombs, people actually know about them. More Germans died
from starvation than victims of Nagasaki AFTER the 1918 armistice when UK
insisted on keeping the blockade for almost another year after the Germans
surrendered [1]. It's not like anyone involved are going to end up in court.

Hell, we're even celebrating Madeleine Albright today as a strong feminist or
something despite her saying it was worth starving more Iraqi children than
Hiroshima+Nagasaki combined [2] during the first gulf war blockades. But ya,
let's get all warm and tingly inside instead because W gave Michelle a candy
or something.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_Germany#After_armi...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_Germany#After_armistice)
[2]
[https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2000/mar/04/weekend7...](https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2000/mar/04/weekend7.weekend9)

------
pizza
Look up what is nicknamed the "Hague Invasion Act" (thanks, John Bolton). The
US is extremely hostile to foreign accountability.

~~~
refurb
Every country should be hostile to foreign accountability. They are sovereign
nations and only accountable to their own citizens.

Do you really want powerful authoritarian countries to take over international
organizations and hold democracies "accountable".

Hell no.

~~~
derefr
I would point out that in the case of the ICC, there are no "powerful
authoritarian countries" which are members. See the graphic on
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome_Statute_of_the_Internatio...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome_Statute_of_the_International_Criminal_Court).
It's basically just the Commonwealth, the EU, and the Nordic countries.

~~~
gabbygab
No powerful authoritarian countries except for former authoritarian european
colonial powers and their former slave colonies?

You act like "just the commonwealth, the EU and nordic" is anything good. The
history of the british empire ( aka the commonwealth ) is as horrible as any
in human history. Not anything humanity should be aspiring to. And the ICC
represents western european domination of the world. That's something I as an
american abhor and reject.

The US should be prosecuting our own war criminals. Unfortunately, we haven't
been doing a good job of it. But lets not pretend the ICC or the EU is any
better. How many EU war criminals have the EU or ICC prosecuted? None.

Most of humanity ( 70% I think ) has rejected the ICC. The world has spoken
regardless of what europeans think or want.

~~~
fixermark
> The US should be prosecuting our own war criminals. Unfortunately, we
> haven't been doing a good job of it.

That's reason enough to want ICC intervention. You can't just denounce the ICC
and then declare in the same post that alternatives aren't going to work.
"Nobody holds the US accountable" isn't really an acceptable scenario.

~~~
thaumasiotes
> "Nobody holds the US accountable" isn't really an acceptable scenario.

Get used to disappointment. That is what it means to be on top.

You could rearrange the world so that there was another power to hold the US
accountable, but you might then have difficulty holding _them_ accountable.

------
Arubis
As embarrassing as this is from the US side of things, it actually gives
credibility to the ICC that the Department of State feels it necessary to push
back against them.

------
jadell
From the ICC's standpoint, a simple counter to this would be to have member
countries deny entry to any US citizen on the ICC's "needs investigation"
list. That includes heads-of-state and their representatives.

Not that I'm advocating for that, but it seems like a solution that would be
pretty simple to implement.

------
mindcrash
This isn't news. At all.

The United States does not, and never has, recognized the International
Criminal Court. To the point that they will not bat an eye and declare war on
the Netherlands in case a American soldier will be held in jail in The Hague
for questioning and appearing before the Court.

And this actually is nothing new and predates the Trump presidency FOR YEARS
(17 to be exact):

The "Hague Invasion Act" like Pizza mentioned below or "American Service-
Members' Protection Act" which is its official name was signed into law by W
on August 2, 2002 and upheld ever since -- yes, even throughout the Obama era.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-
Members'_Prot...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-
Members'_Protection_Act)

EDIT: -1 for facts? That's new.

~~~
camelNotation
As it should be. It's not appropriate to unilaterally exert power over people
who have not consented to it through the establishment of a constitution,
legislative controls, and shared ideals that hold that power as authoritative.
The idea that anyone would just come into our country and demand that we
consent to their understanding of justice, rights, etc. is absurd.

Now, switching topics entirely, are you guys all on board with this American-
led push for the opposition leader in Venezuela? Also, how are things in Syria
and Yemen these days? Libya? Iraq? Afghanistan? Just curious.

~~~
mcv
_> As it should be. It's not appropriate to unilaterally exert power over
people who have not consented to it through the establishment of a
constitution, legislative controls, and shared ideals that hold that power as
authoritative._

The US should not multilaterally accept the prosecution of war crimes because
it's not appropriate to unilaterally exert power over people? That makes no
sense.

On top of that, the US doesn't even agree with your position, because the US
was the primary driver behind the Nuremberg trials to prosecute German war
criminals after WW2, despite Germany not having consented to it through the
establishment of a constitution, legislative controls or shared ideals.

------
diminish
Did Serbia issue any visas to any ICC members? That's the question. So no
matter what ICC can track crimes committed by any party I suppose.

~~~
pjc50
Well, the Serbia of Radovan Karadžić and Slobodan Milošević had been
militarily defeated and collapsed by internal revolution. They could then be
arrested. I dread to think what the equivalent process would look like in the
US.

------
_bxg1
I donate monthly to the ACLU specifically because whenever something like this
comes to light, they're always mentioned as having already begun taking action
against it.

