|
February 12, 2010
In pursuit of global justice
A recent book provides context on the history of the world court.
ROBERT MATAS
This is the continuation of a series coordinated by the Isaac Waldman library and the Independent, featuring community members reviewing books they’ve recently read.
The personal attacks against eminent South African jurist Richard Goldstone, following his report into allegations that Israel may have carried out crimes against humanity during the war in Gaza, have been vicious and unrelenting. Scant attention has been paid to the specific incidents that formed the backbone of his report. The reaction has also overlooked an uncomfortable question: Why is Israel, an outspoken champion of justice, not among the countries supporting the International Criminal Court?
Israel was involved in negotiations in the 1990s, leading up to the creation of a court to handle charges of crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide. Then Israel stepped back, refusing to formally ratify its participation in the institution. Israeli leaders at that time feared that politics could trump justice, with political decisions about issues such as the expansion of West Bank settlements leading to charges before the court. Has nothing changed over the past decade?
It was with this in mind that I picked up Erna Paris’ book The Sun Climbs Slow: Justice in the Age of Imperial America (Knopf Canada, 2008). I wanted to know more about the world court. I was pleased to find the book was a good primer on the issues, although the account, published in 2008, was dated, focusing mostly on George Bush’s first term in office. The book does not deal with shifts in policy in the final Bush years or the tentative steps by the Obama administration to increase U.S. support for the court.
Paris persuasively makes the case for a world court to consider atrocities in countries that are unable or unwilling to prosecute war crimes, genocide or crimes against humanity. How many perpetrators of atrocities around the world have escaped justice? Josef Stalin, Mao Zedong and Pol Pot died of natural causes. Few have been held accountable for deaths in El Salvador, Guatemala, Chile and Argentina. Justice has gone missing in Sudan, Zimbabwe and too many other countries.
Paris writes that the court is important for more than bringing criminals to justice. The court establishes an official historic record of the atrocities, it could deter future genocides, it could play a role in restoring social order and in reconciliation.
She places the issues in the context of a debate throughout history between views represented by 16th-century Niccolo Machiavelli, who maintained that “might is right,” versus the philosophy of 18th-century Immanuel Kant, who promoted universal norms of justice, morality and human rights.
Paris dips even further into history, to Thucydides’ History of the Peleponnesian War in the fifth century BCE, a conflict between Athens and Sparta. She surveys the writing of Socrates, Plato and Greek tragedies to push the point that the commitment to justice has always been deep within the collective conscience of humanity.
Similar to Israel, the United States was in the forefront of the campaign for an international court. But, then, President Bill Clinton refused to have Congress ratify the international agreement that set up the court, contending that the proposed structure could be subject to political manipulation. President George Bush, after 9/11, went even further, working aggressively to undermine the court.
In its war on terrorism, the United States resisted any limitation on its power and insisted on the right to conduct missions without fear of arrests. John Bolton, architect of the Bush policy, required international aid to be tied to a bilateral commitment to not send each other’s nationals to the international court.
The United States cut desperately needed aid to Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Tanzania and South Africa, countries that would not sign an agreement with them. They also withheld aid to Lesotho, which was in a dismal battle against HIV/AIDS, until Lesotho signed on. Jordan, a strong supporter of the court, reversed its position to maintain U.S. aid.
Paris discusses the issues related to a world court with human rights advocates and with critics of the Bush-era policies. She speaks with Robert McNamara, secretary of defence during Vietnam War, who now recognizes how wrong he was. She also profiles judges at the world court.
The book is not about Israel, although parallels can be drawn between the perspectives of the Israeli and U.S. governments. Also, she speaks highly of Goldstone, a distinguished jurist of the South Africa court. Written before the fighting in Gaza, she writes that he was the first highly respected prosecutor-in-chief of the United Nations criminal tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. Ironically, as the prosecutor, Goldstone was criticized for not being aggressive enough in bringing charges against war criminals in the former Yugoslavia.
Now, he is accused of being too aggressive. And a shadow has been cast over Israel. Earlier this year, a former president of Israel’s Supreme Court, Aharon Barak, urged Israel to be part of the
International Criminal Court, despite the risk to Israeli soldiers and politicians. Israel is part of the international community, he said, and it must conduct itself in accordance with the interpretation that is common in international law. The Sun Climbs Slow provides the background for those who were perplexed by his remarks. It is time for Israel to step out of the shadow and revive its role as one of the leaders in the pursuit of justice in the world.
Paris will be speaking at the Vancouver Institute (vaninst.ca) in late March 2010.
Robert Matas is a national correspondent for the Globe and Mail, based in Vancouver.
^TOP
|
