Presidential Candidates & the International Criminal Court

It doesn't get any U.S. news coverage or candidate debate time, but the position of U.S. presidential candidates on whether or not the U.S. should join the International Criminal Court in the Hague (which tries war crimes and human rights abuses when the home nation is unable or unwilling to do so) is one of the most revealing insights into the candidate's entire approach to international law and human rights, says a persuasive article in today's San Francisco Chronicle.

The ICC didn't quite exist when the Supreme Court suspended U.S. democracy and installed G.W. Bush in the White House in 2000. The U.S. had been pushing for something like this ever since the Nuremberg Trials after WWII and the Treaty of Rome which authorized the Court was finished in the last year of Clinton's presidency, but Clinton was "distracted" with the Palestenian peace process and hadn't decided whether or not to send it to the U.S. Senate for ratification--especially since Republicans on the Senate had just blocked his signing of the International Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. During Bush's first year of office, enough nations ratified the Treaty of Rome for the ICC to come into existence, but Bush, who had just finished "unsigning" the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change took the attitude that the ICC was an encroachment on U.S. sovereignty and, after 9/11, not only refused to allow the U.S. to join, but tried to get immunity from prosecution for all U.S. soldiers--our first clue alerting us to the torture and human rights abuses the Bush regime planned. The Bush disdain for the ICC was part of a general disdain of the UN, the Geneva Conventions, and the institutions and processes of international law--despite the fact that both Democrats and Republicans from the U.S. had led in the creation and maturation of these institutions and laws since WWI, and especially since WWII.

Most of the GOP presidential candidates (with the exception of John McCain, torture survivor and former POW), take the Bush line. The Democratic candidates generally favor the ICC, but both Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), and Sen. Barack Obama(D-IL) (perhaps trying for independent voters in the general election) have been cautious--still talking about checking with U.S. military leaders and examining the record of the ICC first. (But if our soldiers follow U.S. and international law, they are not at risk of ICC prosecution. That only happens if (a) we encourage acting outside established rules of war and (b) refuse to prosecute such soldiers ourselves.)

Here are quotes from some of the candidates:

Excerpts from presidential candidates’ statements about the International Criminal Court:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton: “Consistent with my overall policy of reintroducing the United States to the world, I will as president evaluate the record of the court, and reassess how we can best engage with this institution and hold the worst abusers of human rights to account.”

Sen. Barack Obama: “The United States has more troops deployed overseas than any other nation. … Maximum protection for our servicemen and women should come with that increased exposure. Therefore, I will consult thoroughly with our military commanders and also examine the track record of the court before reaching a decision on whether the U.S. should become a state party.”

Former Sen. John Edwards: “When America doesn’t engage in these international institutions, when we show disrespect for international agreements, it makes it extraordinarily difficult when we need the world community to rally around us to get them there. We should be the natural leader in all of these areas, and, certainly, we should be a member of the International Criminal Court.”

Sen. John McCain: “I want us in the ICC, but I’m not satisfied that there are enough safeguards.”

Rep. Dennis Kucinich: “Only the ICC presents a workable framework for the functioning of an international justice system which will affirm the basic human rights of all people.”

Gov. Bill Richardson: “The U.S. should join the International Criminal Court as a full-fledged member. We have nothing to fear.”

Sen. Chris Dodd: “Let’s make good on the vision of (Nuremberg prosecutors) Robert Jackson, Whitney Harris, and my father (former Sen. Thomas Dodd) and lend American support to a strong, stable, permanent international criminal court to help end genocide once and for all.”

Rep. Ron Paul: “The United Nations and the ICC are inherently incompatible with national sovereignty.”

From my perspective, this means that Kucinich, Edwards, Dodd, and Richardson are better candidates for moving the U.S. back toward leadership in peacemaking, protection of international human rights, and support for international law. (These are also the candidates which have pledged to remove ALL U.S. troops from Iraq, not just "combat troops.") These are the candidates the world can trust--the candidates who will stop our horrible moves toward imperialist rogue nation status and return us to the world community. I hope Iowa is paying attention to this tomorrow night and New Hamshire on Tuesday.