Undiplomatic Banner
23 September 2008 Charles J. Brown
10:45 am

Ambassador for All War Crimes except Our Own


Here’s my post that appeared on HuffPo yesterday.  If you haven’t yet, please go give it a read over there, and buzz/digg/stumble upon it.  You can find it here.

Imagine, just for a moment, that President Bush decided to appoint Carly Fiorina as U.S. Ambassador for Global Financial Issues, and then sent her overseas to meet with allies to discuss how they should adopt the American financial services model. After the events of the past few days, she’d be laughed out of every ministry she visited.

Now pretend that we’re not talking about financial services, but rather war crimes. What if the United States had an Ambassador for War Crimes Issues? Given the Bush Administration’s atrocious record on torture, you’d probably conclude that not even Bush would have the testicular fortitude to try to pull off such an audacious act.

You’d be wrong.

Meet Clint Williamson, who might just have the worst job in Washington: U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues. For the past two years, he has “advise[d] the Secretary of State directly and formulate[d] U.S. policy responses to atrocities committed in areas of conflict and elsewhere throughout the world.” His scope of work includes former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Cambodia, Iraq (crimes committed by the former regime, not the current occupation), Sri Lanka, and, as of last week, Georgia.

There’s one important country missing from that list, one responsible for some of the worst war crimes of the past eight years: our own.

According to the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court, “war crimes” are defined to include fifty separate acts that violate the Geneva Conventions, international law, or the laws and customs of war. They include murder, torture, “causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health,” “depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial,” illegal deportation, unlawful confinement, the taking of hostages, and “committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.”

If we accept that definition, then, as Jane Mayer documents in The Dark Side, military and CIA personnel have committed acts that constitute war crimes under international law. These were not, as Donald Rumsfeld contended at the time of Abu Ghraib, isolated acts, committed by rogue personnel. The men and women on the ground committing these abuses did so with the full authorization and support of the Bush Administration.

Senior officials, including the President, Vice President, a Secretary of Defense, two Secretaries of State, three CIA Directors, and two Attorneys General supported or tolerated these acts. A team of lawyers, including David Addington and John Yoo, have crafted legal arguments to validate them (often after the fact), including findings that the President’s power as Commander in Chief overrides the Geneva Conventions, the Convention against Torture, the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and domestic law. These same lawyers also sought to redefine torture downwards to such a degree that even the humiliations suffered by Senator John McCain in Vietnam no longer would qualify.

Of course, when Ambassador Williamson travels overseas, he can’t really discuss any of that. Instead, he must talk about what other countries have done. It must be a miserable job, having to pretend that the country you represent hasn’t tarnished its own reputation to such a degree that you look like an apologist for the very thing you were appointed to oppose.

But that’s not the worst of it. The Office of War Crimes Issues doesn’t just tell other countries to do as we say and not as we do. The Administration has actually made OWCI complicit of its own war crimes apparatus. Since September 11, OWCI has been responsible “for negotiating the repatriation, to their home countries, of individuals detained by the United States for their involvement in terrorist activities.” In other words, whenever the Administration discovers that someone it has tortured or mistreated is, in fact, innocent, it turns to OWCI to make the arrangements to send them home.

I wonder if that tiny little detail ever comes up when Ambassador Williamson travels overseas?

It wasn’t always this way. OWCI was created by then-Secretary Albright to support the International Criminal Tribunals for former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. Its first Ambassador, David Scheffer, played an important role in helping to make those courts effective. He also headed the U.S. delegation to the Rome Conference that created the International Criminal Court. It was, in fact, his leadership that led to the Rome Treaty’s definition of war crimes — the one that the current Administration so blithely ignores.

I was a member of the U.S. delegation to the Rome Conference. Despite the best efforts of the Pentagon to derail the negotiations, U.S. diplomats and lawyers helped make the ICC Statute an effective mechanism for prosecuting the worst of the worst — individuals who commit genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. Although Scheffer ultimately was instructed to vote against the treaty, President Clinton subsequently signed it, demonstrating American willingness to work with the Court and support its goals.

Little did we know then that ten years later, some of the bad guys that the Court was created to prosecute would work for the U.S. government. When Bush decided to “unsign” the ICC treaty in May 2002 — an event that John Bolton called the “happiest day” of his professional career — U.S. officials already were torturing suspected terrorists. The very principles that the U.S. delegation in Rome pushed so hard to have included in the treaty were now being violated by a U.S. government.

Those responsible for this terrible reversal include President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, John Ashcroft, Alberto Gonzales, George Tenet, Condoleezza Rice, Michael Chertoff, and the group of lawyers known inside the Administration as the “War Council” — David Addington, John Yoo, William J. Haynes, and Timothy Flanigan. All twelve should be tried as war criminals, either under the U.S. War Crimes Act of 1996, or, if no American court is willing to pursue the matter, courts in other countries. (Unfortunately, the International Criminal Court cannot prosecute them because the United States is not a party to the Rome Treaty.)

Clint Williamson worked honorably for seven years as a trial attorney at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. He clearly knows what constitutes war crimes. He must realize that those he works for — including the woman he advises on war crimes issues — are responsible for acts not dissimilar to the ones committed by those he used to prosecute at the Hague. And he must realize that, by having his office repatriate the system’s victims, he is helping to conceal the truth.

Mr. Williamson should resign, and the position he now holds should remain vacant until the United States can practice what it so hypocritically preaches. If he instead chooses to remain in a compromised and largely ceremonial job, the very least he could do is agree to accept a new title: Ambassador-at-Large for All War Crimes except Our Own.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

| posted in foreign policy, politics, war & rumors of war | 3 Comments

22 August 2008 Charles J. Brown
11:22 am

Breaking: Bush Signs Kyoto Agreement


Actually, this is exactly how my friends at the NSC got Clinton to sign the International Criminal Court treaty:

Enlisted by members of the House and Senate, presidential aide Rebecca Tandy brought a copy of the international climate-change treaty to President Bush’s desk Monday and asked him to sign a birthday document for a Japanese dignitary named “Kyoto Protocol.” “Mr. Protocol really likes treaties, so we got him this treaty instead of a card, so if you could just—all the other countries have already signed it,” a nervous Tandy reportedly said to Bush, who quickly scrawled his signature on the treaty and told her to tell Kyoto he said “hi.”

The Onion is two for two today.

| posted in foreign policy, media, politics, pop culture | 0 Comments

30 July 2008 Charles J. Brown
06:56 pm

Thabo Mbeki Is So Bad….


…that he’s starting to make George W. Bush look good in comparison.  At least on Sudan.  From Reuters:

South Africa and Libya, backed by Russia and China, want to include a paragraph halting any ICC moves in a resolution to extend the mandate of a joint U.N.-African Union peacekeeping mission in Darfur (UNAMID), which expires on Thursday.

But the United States, France and other Western countries made it clear that they wanted to keep two issues separate. As a result, The council failed to reach any agreement.

“We have a division in the council at this point,” U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Zalmay Khalilzad told reporters. He said there was no point in linking the UNAMID mandate to any possible future indictments by the ICC.

First the ChiComs, now the Americans.  If The Mbekster were a college student, he’d be hired by dorks to hang out with them so that they could look cool in comparison.

| posted in foreign policy, war & rumors of war | 0 Comments

27 July 2008 Charles J. Brown
11:15 am

Mbend It Like Mbeki


I bet that if Thabo Mbeki were to have a Facebook page, he would be one of those people who friends everybody, but who has almost everyone ignore the request.  Everyone except dictators, that is.

We already knew that the MBekster had a soft spot in his head heart for Zimbabwe President-for-Life-of-Misery Robert Mugabe.  It turns out, however that no dictator is safe from this guys warm embrace:

South Africa’s president has called on the International Criminal Court not to prosecute Sudan’s leader for war crimes in case it upsets Darfur’s peace talks.

Thabo Mbeki told South African TV that Omar al-Bashir’s continued presence as head of state was also needed to assist the country’s post-civil war security.

Maybe Radovan Karadzic can get Mbeki to put in a good word for him at his upcoming trial.  I understand that Mbeki feels he’s essential to peace and reconciliation in Bosnia.

UPDATE: So I just checked.  The MBekster does not have a Facebook page.  But here are some of the groups others have created to express their feelings about him:

  • South Africans Embarassed by Thabo Mbeki (233 members)
  • Leave Thabo Mbeki Aloooooooooone!! Alone He is the Best President Ever! (174 members)
  • Thabo Mbeki — Africa’s Newest Dictator (59 members)
  • Thabo Mbeki is on Mugabe’s Payroll (62 members)
  • I Hate Thabo Mbeki (43 members)
  • Thabo Mbeki Sucks…. (35 members)
  • Thabo Mbeki:  South Africa’s Downfall! (15 members)
  • Thabo Mbeki “I am Not Useless” (11 members)
  • Thabo Mbeki is a Coward and a Danger to South Africa (9 members)
  • Rein in Thabo Mbeki (7 members)
  • Remove Thabo Mbeki from Office Now! (7 members)
  • Thabo Mbeki Go to Hell (2 members)
  • Thabo Mbeki Is Spineless (2 members)

Come on, folks, how do you really feel?

| posted in foreign policy, war & rumors of war | 0 Comments

26 July 2008 Charles J. Brown
11:45 am

One of These Things Is Not Like the Others


Let’s play compare and contrast for a moment, boys and girls.  Today’s topic is U.S. Government support for international justice.  See if you can find which of these things is not like the others.

Read the rest of this entry »

| posted in foreign policy, war & rumors of war, world at home | 0 Comments

21 July 2008 Charles J. Brown
11:40 pm

White House Responds to Karadzic Arrest


For once we don’t need the diplospeak translator:

We congratulate the Government of Serbia, and thank the people who conducted this operation for their professionalism and courage. This operation is an important demonstration of the Serbian Government’s determination to honor its commitment to cooperate with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The timing of the arrest, only days after the commemoration of the massacre of over 7,000 Bosnians committed in Srebrenica, is particularly appropriate, as there is no better tribute to the victims of the war’s atrocities than bringing their perpetrators to justice.

Imagine the impact were the White House to say something similar about the ICC indictment of Bashir….

| posted in foreign policy, war & rumors of war | 0 Comments

21 July 2008 Charles J. Brown
05:18 pm

The Bush Administration’s Harry Mudd Moment


The Star Trek character, not the California college.

George Bush has long been on the record as hating opposing the International Criminal Court and its evil plan to feed American babies to wolves. Shortly after taking office, Bush announced that he was “unsigning” the treaty, an event that troglyoconservative John Bolton called “the happiest moment of my government service.”

Read the rest of this entry »

| posted in none of the above | 0 Comments

  • Contact Me

  • cbrown_at_undiplomatic.net
  • Polls

  • What should Obama do about the Bush Administration's war crimes?

    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...

  • Archive