China's complicity with Sudan genocide
Many aid workers and diplomats suffered a panic attack when the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court sought an arrest warrant this week for the president of Sudan, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, for committing genocide. They feared that Mr. Bashir would retaliate by attacking peacekeepers and humanitarian workers.Whether China will react as it should to the inhumanity of Bashir is an open question. It has also supplied Mugabe's genocidal regime in Zimbabwe. Russia and China have been carrying the brief for genocide in both Sudan and Zimbabwe. I think it is because they fear the same charges against their own brutal repression of internal enemies.But instead of wringing our hands, we should be applauding. The prosecution for genocide is a historic step that also creates an opportunity in Sudan, particularly if China can now be induced and shamed into suspending the transfer of weapons used to slaughter civilians in Darfur.
If China continues — it is the main supplier of arms used in the genocide — then it may itself be in violation of the 1948 Genocide Convention. Article III of the convention declares that one of the punishable crimes is “complicity in genocide”; that’s the crime that China may be committing if it goes on supplying arms used for genocide, even after the I.C.C. has begun criminal proceedings against the purchaser of those weapons.
Beijing seems unabashed. Incredibly, China and Russia are acting as Mr. Bashir’s lawyers, quietly urging the United Nations Security Council to intervene to delay criminal proceedings against him. Such a delay is a bad idea, unless Mr. Bashir agrees to go into exile.
Still, China does care about its image. Beijing supplied arms to Pol Pot’s genocidal regime in Cambodia but later distanced itself from the Khmer Rouge as international criticism grew. China also supported Slobodan Milosevic until he was indicted, but then almost immediately let him hang out to dry.
...
I have always thought that those who would not prosecute evil for fear of the consequences were mistaken. The best course of action is to pursue the rule of law and let the chips fall where they may.
Comments
Post a Comment