Reply #4: For the Triumph of Evil (WP Editorial)

[gottaB]

NEXT WEEK the U.N. Security Council will consider whether to refer the genocide in the Sudanese region of Darfur to international prosecutors. Many U.N. members would like to bring in the International Criminal Court (ICC), a fledgling institution whose authority they are keen to bolster. The Bush administration would prefer to create a new, ad hoc court, believing that the ICC is an unaccountable posse of lawyers who may one day seek to indict American service members. Neither side should let the dispute over the choice of court get in the way of the objective that both profess to share: holding Sudan's war criminals accountable. But it's even more important that the prosecution of war crimes should not be mistaken for an adequate policy on Darfur.

The best way to resolve the court dispute is for the Bush administration to accept the European position. We share the administration's misgivings about the ICC's ability to bring indictments without first getting a green light from the U.N. Security Council or some other political authority. Unrestrained prosecutors may one day decide, as some human rights groups claimed after the Kosovo war in 1999, that a U.S. humanitarian intervention involves war crimes. But, in the case of Darfur, this worry is irrelevant. Because Sudan is not a signatory to the ICC and the crimes have taken place on Sudanese territory, a Security Council resolution is required before the ICC can get involved. The Bush administration can support such a resolution without thereby legitimizing the ICC prosecutions in cases in which there's no U.N. authorization.

U.S. support for an ICC referral might not achieve much. China might well veto a referral, perhaps with the support of Russia. But even if the ICC was given the authority to get involved in Darfur, the effect on Sudanese behavior would be uncertain. Indictments might even weaken the incentive for Sudanese leaders to improve their behavior, if they believe there's no hope of leniency in any case. The main benefit in terms of deterring genocide would be realized only in the distant future. If the world establishes a track record of holding war criminals accountable, potential criminals in future conflicts may hesitate.

If prosecution isn't going to stop Sudan's genocide, the United States and its allies must pull other levers. The small African Union monitoring force must be expanded and its mandate strengthened; the force must be allowed to confront, rather than just monitor, killers. Anybody who doubts that this is necessary need only consider the recent outbreak of violence. Government troops and their allies in the Janjaweed militia have recently destroyed as many as 25 ethnic African villages, and Sudan's government has reportedly prevented African Union monitors from compiling reports on what happened. But according to news reports, more than 100 civilians were killed in an attack on the village of Hamada in mid-January, and most of the victims were women and children. On Wednesday, a similar number of civilians were murdered in the village of Rahad Kabolong.

For the Triumph of Evil....