Friday 26 June 2015

‘ICC faces credibility test over Israeli war crimes investigation in Gaza’ - RT.com

The ICC's biggest test yet!  We shall wait with bated breath......will the IDF be tried for war crimes or will the ICC brush this one under the carpet......

*************************************************************

http://rt.com/op-edge/269899-icc-palestine-israel-war-crimes/

ICC faces credibility test over Israeli war crimes investigation in Gaza’
                                                                                            
If the International Criminal Court fails to open an investigation into alleged Israeli war crimes in Palestine the UN court may collapse, warns John Dugard, former special rapporteur to the UN Human Rights Council concerning Palestinian affairs.
Palestinian officials have presented evidence of alleged Israeli atrocities committed during last year's war in Gaza to the International Criminal Court. This follows the publication of a damning UN report on the conflict. Israel denies all the allegations of war crimes against its soldiers.
RT: Is the Palestinian submission and the UN findings enough for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to open a full investigation?
John Dugard: Certainly there is enough information. The Palestinian Authority has provided much information today, but in addition of course, one must have regard to the Human Rights Council recent fact-finding report. And then there is also the publication of a document by Israeli soldiers, called “Breaking the Silence,” in which they described the manner in which the Gaza War was conducted. There is also the report prepared by the UN Secretary General in respect to attacks on UN premises. So in my view, there is clearly sufficient evidence to enable the prosecutor to open an investigation into war crimes committed in Palestine both in respect of the Gaza War and the construction of settlements.

RT: The Palestinians risk losing out on $400 million of annual aid from the US which opposes an investigation of Israel. How much pressure does this prospect put on Gaza?
JD: The US is not a member of the ICC, but that doesn’t deter it from exercising influence behind the scenes and there is no doubt that it does bring pressure to bear on member states, particularly in the EU. And it’s an open secret that some member states of the EU are not very enthusiastic about investigating Israel’s crimes. But I think one must bear in mind that the ICC at this stage faces a real credibility test. You know that recently there was an attempt to arrest Sudan President Omar al-Bashir in South Africa and the government allowed President al-Bashir to leave the country despite a court order prohibiting him from leaving South Africa. But that has given rise to a debate in South Africa and in Africa about the question of whether African states should remain in the ICC. And I have no doubt that they are looking to the Palestinian issue to see whether it’s worth their while to remain in the ICC. I think that if the prosecutor of the ICC fails to open an investigation into crimes committed in Palestine, then there is a very real danger that the ICC will fall apart because African states will decide to leave it.
RT: The UN report also accused Hamas of war crimes. Do the Palestinians accept these findings?
JD: The Palestinians have been quite clear that they have accepted membership of the ICC in the understanding that their own citizens - members of Hamas and other militant groups - are also exposed to prosecutions. So Palestinians are quite prepared to see an even-handed prosecution of both Israelis and Palestinians and I think that speaks well for the Palestinians in this case.
RT: How will you sum up Israel’s response?
JD: Israel takes the view that it has the most moral army in the world, and that of course its soldiers could not commit war crimes, which of course is disproved by the fact-finding missions to which I have referred. Israel has set up its own investigation, but that has simply whitewashed the whole Israeli involvement in Gaza and it’s quite clear that the Israelis are determined not to prosecute its own soldiers for crimes committed in the Gaza war.

Monday 15 June 2015

Human Rights and the ICC


What constitutes crimes against humanity? Which body decides who is guilty of crimes against humanity and human rights violations?  The only International body founded to determine and try war crimes or crimes against humanity is supposedly the ICC (International Criminal Court). Another victim (dare I say African) targeted by the ICC is Sudan’s President Omar Al-Bashir, allegedly wanted for genocide and war crimes against his own people. While there is no doubt that there have been a few African heads of state guilty of similar crimes, e.g. DRC’s Thomas Lubanga, Ivory Coast’s Laurent Gbagbo, Libya’s Seif Islam Gadaffi, and numerous others, much less is said about other leaders around the world, specifically from the West, who have committed similar crimes and worse, but with no consequences for their actions.

Wars by western countries against countries like Afganistan, Libya, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen has killed thousands of innocent victims, including women, children and the elderly.  There have been endless examples of atrocities committed by these military invasions, but no action is taken against the perpetrators. The wars in Libya, Yemen and Syria are illegal, and as such makes the violence against the country’s inhabitants a case for war crimes. The illegal drone attacks by the US military in Pakistan has also caused untold suffering of Pakistani families, yet the ICC and the UN turns a blind eye to these atrocities. The constant Israeli blockade and attacks on the people of Gaza and Lebanon is a classic case, but the Israeli government persists in their behaviour with scant regard or respect for humanity or the sovereignty of the people of Palestine. The attacks by Saudi Arabia and Bahrain on the poorest nation in the world, Yemen, is a totally illegal invasion, and unspeakable atrocities are committed by these governments on the people of Yemen, yet the ICC and the UN pretends there is nothing untoward in this flagrant abuse of international law. The illegal war by NATO on the Libyan people has killed thousands and displaced close to a million others, and no uproar from the UN or the ICC.

Western leaders like George W Bush (Dubya), Tony Blair, Barrack Obama, David Cameron and several others are continually declaring war on weaker nations with flimsy excuses for their invasions, yet nothing or no-one can touch them for the war crimes they brought upon the nations they invaded.  The AU (although they are just another elitist club with the same agenda as the G7) is correct in alleging the ICC is more Africa focussed when it came to the prosecution of war crimes.  And they have every reason to conclude this, given that the 8 cases the ICC is busy investigating is all from African countries. From an ICC point of view, International law must be applied to some but others are exempt from the same prosecutorial processes. In this case, all third world countries are fair game to be tried for war crimes, and Western or first world nations and their leaders are exempt. For once I agree with the ANC when they claimed that the ICC is no longer the useful legal entity for which it was intended!

Thursday 4 June 2015

Washington Politicizes Football - By Paul Craig Roberts


I rest my case.......!!
_____________________________________________________________

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article42036.htm


By Paul Craig Roberts

June 03, 2015 "Information Clearing House" - Washington’s attack on world soccer is following the script of Washington’s attack on the Russian-hosted Sochi Olympics. The difference is that Washington couldn’t stop the Olympics from being held in Sochi, and was limited to scaring off westerners with lies and propaganda. In the current scandal orchestrated by Washington, Washington intends to use its takeover of FIFA to renege on FIFA’s decision that Russia host the next World Cup.
This is part of Washington’s agenda of isolating Russia from the World. This Washington-orchestrated scandal stinks to high heaven. It seems obvious that the FIFA officials have been arrested for political reasons and that the recently overwhelmingly-reelected FIFA president, Sepp Blatter, was forced to resign by Washington’s threats to indict him as well. This can happen because Washington no longer is subject to the rule of law. In Washington’s hands, law is a weapon that is used against everyone, every organization, and every country that takes a position independent of Washington. This clears the deck for Washington and its British lapdog to take over FIFA, which henceforth will be used to reward countries that comply with Washington’s foreign policy and to punish those who pursue an independent foreign policy.
 
The only hope for South America, Asia, and Russia is to form their own World Cup and turn their backs on the corrupt West. It is astonishing that Russia, Asia, and South America so much desire to be part of the corrupt and immoral Western world. Why do countries wish to be associated with evil? Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, and perhaps Argentina and Brazil have learned that being in the Western orbit means putting their country under Washington’s control.  Putin, Lavrov, and China’s leaders say that being associated with the West is like being associated with the plague. Yet they still want to be associated with the West. Why do Russia and China think that their self-esteem depends on Washington’s approval? FIFA is a Swiss-based organization. Yet the arrests of FIFA officials is based on a Washington-initiated “investigation” by the FBI. By asserting the universality of US law, Washington is asserting the authority of its police and prosecutors over sovereign countries.
Why did Switzerland, and why do other countries lay down in obedience to Washington’s assertion of the universality of its laws? Are the political leaders paid off or are they threatened with assassination or false indictments? What explains that of all countries on earth only Washington’s law is universal, acknowledged and bowed down before in other countries? Is if fear of retribution?
Possibly, but one answer is that the entire point of being a leader of a foreign country is to be made rich by kowtowing to Washington. One year out of office and Tony Blair was reported to be worth $50 million. Where did the money come from? No one wanted to listen to Blair’s speeches when he was Prime Minister. Why did Americans pay him six-figure sums to give speeches?
Putin can become rich, too. All he needs to do is to turn Russia over to Washington.
Here we are in an orchestrated soccer scandal hyped to the hilt by the presstitute media while all the real scandals go unremarked.
 
For example, a number of the mega-banks in the West have pleaded guilty to felony charges and only suffered fines. As Finian Cunningham has pointed out, the money laundering and price-rigging by the “banks too big to jail” dwarfs the alleged criminality at FIFA. The Securities and Exchange Commission actually issues waivers to the banks for their criminal activity. One dissenting SEC commissioner accuses her colleagues of encouraging “recidivism” by the constant issue of waivers. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-22/sec-commissioner-furious-sec-has-made-mockery-recidivist-criminal-behavior-banks
Washington itself cannot be believed as not a single significant statement out of Washington’s mouth since the Clinton regime has been true; yet, Washington still parades around as the arbiter of truth.
Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction. Assad did not use chemical weapons. Iran did not have a nuclear weapons program. Russia did not invade Ukraine. But Washington convinced the world that its lies were true. It is almost a certainty that politicians up in arms over unsubstantiated charges that FIFA took bribes have themselves taken bribes. Just look at the bribes given to Congress by corporations to vote fast track for TTIP. Http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/may/27/corporations-paid-us-senators-fast-track-tpp
Can anyone name even one leader of one EU country (other perhaps than Greece at the moment) who doesn’t take bribes from Washington? According to Udo Ulfkotte, no one can name even one British or EU newspaper that doesn’t take bribes from the CIA. How many UN votes are determined by Washington’s threats and bribes? Whether or not FIFA decisions are tainted by bribery, the purpose of the “investigation” is to cast doubt on the decision to hold the World Cup in Russia. The World Cup is a global spectacle and conveys prestige on the host country. Washington intends to deny this prestige to Russia. That is what the “investigation” is about.
 
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following

Monday 1 June 2015

A Superpower in denial

The inevitable decline of the US as the only global Superpower, is well underway, as witnessed in the piece below. While expanding their military bases across the globe since World War II, the US has consistently pursued a policy for a military-industrial complex to ensure dominance the world over, and to prevent any competitor from challenging their superiority.
This has led to the decline and neglect of US internal policies for growth of social, economical and political significance. The rise of Russia and China as direct competitors who are expanding their global presence through economic and military trade, has left the US out in the cold.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article42010.htm

US Resorts to the Viagra of Militarism
By Finian Cunningham


May 31, 2015 "Information Clearing House" - "SCF" -  The behaviour of the United States is the archetypal response of a tyrant whose days are numbered. Or an empire that is crumbling before its very eyes. In denial of demise, it wields a still formidable military power in a bid to compensate for impotence in all other spheres: culturally, morally, economically, politically, the once virile giant is but a shell of its former self. Instead of bowing out gracefully to the realities of a changing world, Washington is using militarism like viagra to postpone the inevitable. 
 
Following the Second World War, American world leadership was indisputable. «Pax Americana» – a world order under US financial and political terms – appeared to reign supreme. But even in those halcyon days, trouble was in store for the more perceptive of American planners.
In a secret memo, PSS/23, written in 1948 and declassified in 1974, the eminent US State Department planner George Kennan had this to say of the emerging global order and in particular US relations with Asia: «We must be very careful when we speak of exercising ‘leadership’ in Asia. We are deceiving ourselves and others when we pretend to have answers to the problems, which agitate many of these Asiatic peoples. Furthermore, we have about 50 per cent of the world's wealth but only 6.3 per cent of its population. This disparity is particularly great as between ourselves and the peoples of Asia… In the face of this situation… We should cease to talk about vague — and for the Far East — unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards, and democratisation. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are hampered by idealistic slogans, the better». Note how Kennan, who also authored the Cold War policy of «containment» toward the Soviet Union, is encumbered with conceited notions of «American exceptionalism» – natural leadership, idealism and so on. Nevertheless the revealing apprehension in Kennan’s words is the realisation that American economic dominance was disproportionate and unsustainable. He admitted with refreshing candidness that such an inherent imbalance of resources and global human needs would have to increasingly rely on brute power in order to maintain the disparity.
 
To reiterate Kennan: «The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are hampered by idealistic slogans, the better». Indeed, that day seems to be have arrived. Almost in every continent, America is abandoning any semblance of diplomacy and instead is trying to use raw, unilateral, military force to assert its perceived – albeit unjustified – rights to dominance.  Washington’s sanctioning and threatening of Venezuela, Iran, Russia – the latter through unprecedented NATO war manoeuvres – are prime examples. The arraignment of FIFA football officials in Switzerland last week over alleged corruption at the behest of American law enforcement authorities is another example of how Washington views itself as having the prerogative to impose its will regardless of foreign jurisdictions.  US deteriorating relations with China are the latest manifestation of America’s self-declared «manifest destiny» to behave like a global hegemon. Secretary of Defence Ashton Carter at the weekend stepped into the sensitive issue of territorial disputes between China and its Asian neighbours. Ashton’s steps were those of someone wearing hobnail boots. He «demanded» that China immediately cease all its land reclamation projects in the South China Sea. 
 
Only weeks before, US Secretary of State John Kerry made similar high-handed demands while visiting Beijing. Previously, US Admiral Harry Harris lambasted China for building «a great wall of sand» in the South China Sea – a strategically important global trade route.
Washington is increasingly and openly jettisoning its erstwhile image of «neutral broker» and adopting a provocative partisan position, accusing China of militarism and expansionism that is allegedly threatening American regional allies in the Philippines, Indonesia and Japan. Newly burnished «defence pacts» are giving the US the automatic «right» to go to war to «protect» partners if its «vital interests are threatened». The increasing deployment of American navy, warplanes and missile systems – under the guise of «protecting its partners» – is fuelling militarisation of the territorial disputes.  China, for its part, says that its own military presence in the region is to protect its voluminous trade routes. Beijing has pointedly refused to cease its maritime development projects, mainly land reclamation in shoals and reefs that it says are strictly within its territorial limits. 
 
In response to Washington’s latest ultimatums, Cui Tiankai, China’s ambassador to the US, expressed his country’s alarm at the way Washington is «escalating» tensions in the region and making it «less stable». Cui told the Wall Street Journal that US demands were «very surprising to us». The ambassador added that «the US has overreacted to the situation and is escalating the situation». China’s perplexity is readily understandable. While Washington accuses Beijing of «militarism» in the region, it is the US that has recently encroached on China’s territory with warships and reconnaissance planes in what appears to be «an attempt to provoke and escalate the situation,» said Cui.  The Chinese diplomat added: «And the US is also making a lot of statements, making false accusations against China and taking sides in the territorial disputes in the region. That will really make the situation in the region less stable. So we are worried about such overreaction from the United States».
 
The analogy here with Russia is salient. The US and its NATO allies are conducting numerous «war games» at ever-increasing scale and frequency around Russia’s territory – from the Baltic to the Black Sea and in between – and yet Washington upends this provocative reality by accusing Moscow of militarism and expansionism. As Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said, central to Washington’s problem is that it cannot come to terms with the changing multipolar nature of the world. The rise of China as the world’s largest economy and its expanding economic presence in Africa, Asia and Latin America go hand in hand with the growing importance of Russia, India and other emerging nations. The new Silk Roads of global trade that China in particular is paving are a sign of America’s diminishing role as a global power centre. Unable to deal with its own demise, Washington is resorting to the viagra of militarism to effect an image of virility that it no longer possesses in practice. 
 
The multipolar world is being formed under legitimate relations and circumstances of trade and investment. It is only the decrepit US and its hanger-on European allies that view these changes as illegitimate. It is subjective and politicised. Rather than accepting the new global reality, Washington is seeking to postpone the inevitable by contriving confrontations with perceived rivals – China and Russia in particular.  Or, as US planner George Kennan admitted back in 1948, Washington is dispensing with fictitious notions of democracy and human rights and is now, by necessity, having to deal in raw power concepts – that is militarism. However, the very real danger is that the senile old power that US capitalism has become might detonate a world war from reckless denial of its own demise. 
 
Somebody needs to take away the viagra and slip a sedative into its cup of coca.
© Strategic Culture Foundation