So the prosecutor for the International Criminal Court has formally requested an arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir on charges of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes in Darfur. To no one’s surprise, the Sudanese government has rejected the charges as baseless, but one criticism that’s also coming from some members of the international community is that the ICC’s actions will jeopardize the fragile humanitarian relief effort and security environment in the country. According to one expert quoted by The New York Times , popular demonstrations in support of the court are likely to spring up in Darfur’s refugee camps and “explode into violence,” bringing the threat of further bloodshed. This is wildly frustrating, of course. Of course we need to mitigate any threats to the humanitarian relief effort and to the peacekeeping forces, and it’s true the crisis in Darfur has escalated to such a point that there will be negative short-term consequences for any action taken. But to argue that such risks should stay the hand of the ICC at the risk of “breaking the peace” is absurd, mainly because there isn’t any kind of meaningful peace process that’s currently underway. At the least, the court’s arrest warrant could serve as a leverage point for the UN Security Council. The Security Council has the power to forestall the ICC’s proceedings for at least a year under Article 16 of the court’s statute. It could con ...
Anytime
