The recent United Nation Security Council decision to freeze the assets of the Gaddafi family was heralded as a high-point of international cooperation to fight authoritarian abuse. What has gotten less press attention is the role of the United States in drafting the resolution. The Obama Administration insisted on adding a provision that barred the punishment of mercenaries for war crimes committed in the country — out of concern that the same principle could be used against U.S. contractors in places like Iraq.
The U.S. move is consistent with President Obama’s policy of the last two years in barring the prosecution of any U.S. officials for ordering or carrying out torture of detainees in violation of a host of international agreements. His Administration has also worked to bar any prosecution of U.S. contractors accused of murdering citizens in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The U.S. provision states:
6. Decides that nationals, current or former officials or personnel from a State outside the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya which is not a party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of that State for all alleged acts or omissions arising out of or related to operations in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya established or authorized by the Council, unless such exclusive jurisdiction has been expressly waived by the State.
In one article, French Permanent Representative Gerard Araud responded to a torrent of criticism over the provisions by explaining
“that’s, that was for one country, it was absolutely necessary for one country to have that considering its parliamentary constraints, and this country we are in. It was a red line for the United States. It was a deal-breaker, and that’s the reason we accepted this text to have the unanimity of the Council.”
Obama’s contribution at this high point of international cooperation is to insert an ignoble provision barring war crimes prosecutions in Libya. We have now come to this. While we once were the leader in war crimes prosecutions, we are now viewed as an enabler of such conduct. What is striking is that none of these individuals — or the victims — are U.S. citizens. While the measure does not prevent prosecution by host nations, it blocks the most likely forum for punishment. The United States has shown how a nation can simply refuse to prosecute individuals who admit to acts that constitute torture or war crimes. Thus, when it allows for mercenaries to “be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction” of their own country, the Obama Administration has already shown how such nations can protect people accused of war crimes and has taken steps to prevent other nations from enforcing international agreements on torture.
We are now viewed as not just hypocritical on human rights, but effectively making war crimes prosecutions as discretionary matter for nations.
In this case, the Obama Administration will guarantee that those mercenaries from Algeria, Ethiopia and Tunisia would not be prosecuted in Libya — the scene of the crimes including gunning down unarmed civilians and other atrocities. It continues a controversial policy of President George W. Bush.
Source: Telegraph
Jonathan Turley
Blouise,
with all of this Citizens United money flying around, President Obama may have a tough battle, but you are correct that with the people who have announced their intentions to run or are likely to run, he should win.
“You claim that Obama is so unpopular, but why hasn’t a decent republican stepped up to run against him? ” (SwM)
bada bing, bada boom
No decent republican is going to run against Obama in 2012 because the loss is guaranteed … 2016 is where all the real effort and money will go
bdaman, You claim that Obama is so unpopular, but why hasn’t a decent republican stepped up to run against him? BTW, I don’t like country music or honkytonks.
Does anybody see any Obama Biden stickers anymore.
What an historic time.
Here’s one from CNN
Obama embraces earlier state flexibility on health care reform
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/02/28/obama.health.care/index.html?hpt=T2
rafflaw, Chicago pizza is better. Send me a Lou Malnati’s for dinner. Blouise, Thank you.
This comment on the above post hits it:
“Dana1982 1 minute ago (4:01 PM)
75 Fans
Obama shouldn’t be weakening a plan that was hard fought by our Democrat congressmen last year. This fight caused many good people to loose their seats to a highly charged, misinformed public. If anything, President Obama should be pushing to close the gap and provide us with the public option so our health care needs will be free for everyone. I have to say I’m disappointed at his actions.”
Protect Mercenaries,and your knees are starting to buckle after the long and bitter health care fight,What is going on??
WASHINGTON — White House officials insisted on Monday that President Barack Obama’s embrace of a provision that would give states the right to opt out of his health care law three years earlier then is currently allowed was a function of policy preferences and not due to ongoing legal drama.
Behind the scenes, however, defenders of the legislation quickly began an aggressive push to see if the new provision, which moves the opt-out date from 2017 to 2014, could alter the balance of arguments taking place both in the courts and the realm of public opinion.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/28/obamas-embrace-of-health-care-opt-out_n_829314.html
rafflaw
1, February 28, 2011 at 3:52 pm
Blouise,
Can I get a pizza delivered to me, here in Woodstock, Illinois?? I haven’t had lunch and now I am getting hungry reading about these pizzas!!
============================================
You, sir, are a scam artist … how about a nice floral arrangement?
\^*^/
|
=
SwM,
You do a good job of ignoring the needless hyperbole and staying with the point of the discussion … remaining calm in the face of deliberate provocation is not on your “list of faults”. 🙂
Blouise,
Can I get a pizza delivered to me, here in Woodstock, Illinois?? I haven’t had lunch and now I am getting hungry reading about these pizzas!!
mail -sb – main
Buckeye,
(I posted this message but it didn’t show up so I’m posting again)
I have passed on your suggestion (putting info directly to the site) to the appropriate people.
The Ohio office for the AFL-CIO is located in Columbus and you may call them at 614-224-8271. You may also go on line to the mail AFL-CIO web site and click on the tab “Get Involved” which will take you to a map wherein you may find the state’s web site with numbers and names etc.
Anyone who would like to help can do the same for any state wherein protesters are gathering … find it on the map and call to see what they need. Just because you can’t be there doesn’t mean you can’t help those who are.
Just got back from my 3 mile bike ride to pick my daughter up from school. Man it is absolutely gorgeous in N Fla. The U.V. rays are kickin. It won’t be long now til da lady’s b saying,
Bdaman you gots some beautiful skin, as they run days hand up my baby oiled arms. 🙂
Do yourselves a favor spend some time in the great outdoors.
Get some fresh air.
Buddha the boys are back in town and they took down my post.
Want me to put it up there again? 🙂
@Swarthmore: My goal is a country where people are free and the corporations, government agencies, and the military are prevented from exploiting them, lying to them, putting them in harm’s way, blackmailing them, holding them hostage, ripping them off or fucking them over. In addition, my goal is to share the high cost of this governance by equalizing the pain of sharing the cost, which demands those with the greatest assets pay the largest percentage and those with the least in assets pay the least percentage.
Oddly, my goals are probably closely aligned with yours, you just think you can somehow get there with magical thinking, and I do not believe in magic.
Ron Paul receives plenty of flack and derision from the media on his views, and has been booed on stage for stating his policy positions. In fact, openly stating his positions has probably cost him higher office, including any chance at the Presidential nomination in 2008. The media labeled him a “fringe candidate” due to his openly stated libertarian views, and then treated his comments and debate points as examples of crazy talk. The blow back is what has blocked him thus far from having any real chance at higher office. It is hard to elect an honest man; certainly if Obama had been honest I would not have voted for him, and now that I know the truth, I will not vote for him again.
Tony C Your strategy worked. The democrats were punished and Scott Walker was elected. Are you closer to you goals? I still haven’t figured out what they are.
@Swarthmore: I said the failure of your “relative-good” system.
Shall I add illiteracy to your list of faults, or is this just you refusing to acknowledge that your foolish system of never ever punishing any Democrat anywhere for being an unprincipled corporate shill has now produced a complete civil rights and progressive policy disaster in this country?
Tony c, I do fully comprehend the “relatively good system”. Al Gore was “relatively good” compared to Bush. I don’t think he would have invade Iraq. I don’t think Ron Paul received any blow back from his Texas district. He sticks with them on social issues. Vote for whomever or write someone in.