Sudan issue could divide EU and US again
BRUSSELS, Feb 3, 2005 (IPS) — United Nations recommendations that violence in the Darfur region of Sudan should be referred to the International Criminal Court is threatening to bring tensions between the European Union and the United States over the issue to a head.
A five-member UN commission concluded Monday (Jan. 31) that the widespread killings in the western region of Darfur in Sudan is not genocide, but that both the government and the Janjaweed militia are responsible for “serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law amounting to crimes under international law.”
The special UN commission “strongly” recommended that the 15-member UN Security Council refer the Darfur case to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague to pursue charges of crimes against humanity in Sudan.
The ICC, which came into being a year ago, is the first permanent global criminal court to try individuals for genocide, war crimes and massive human rights abuses.
But the court has been an irritant in trans-Atlantic relations since 2001 when President George W. Bush started his first term in office. While the European Union (EU) champions the court, the United States has refused to sign up to it.
The dispute, which has been simmering for many years, resurfaced at a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels Monday (Jan. 31) following the UN commission’s recommendations.
Germany, supported by the Netherlands and Sweden, is trying to get EU member states to pull together over the issue.
Speaking after the ministers meeting, EU foreign affairs chief Javier Solana told media representatives that those responsible for the violence in Darfur should face war crimes charges at the ICC.
“Although Sudan is not a signatory to the ICC, the United Nations should really work in that direction if there are people accused of crimes against humanity,” he said.
However, the United States insists that Sudan is committing genocide in the Darfur region and is urging the UN Security Council to consider imposing sanctions on Sudan.
It is also calling for the UN to set up a special court in Arusha, Tanzania, to try those accused of war crimes in the conflict in Sudan, rather than at the ICC.
“Our lack of support for the International Criminal Court referral option should come as no surprise, given our well-known objections to the court,” a spokesman at the U.S. mission to the EU told IPS Wednesday. “The UN report makes clear the need for prompt Council action, and so it’s in the best interest of all, especially the people of Darfur, to avoid protracted debate on the court.”
The United States says its plans for a special court to deal with the Darfur case would involve African countries integrally in the process, in keeping with the African Union’s leading role on Darfur.
“It also has the practical advantage of building on the existing infrastructure of the UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). This will allow the Sudan tribunal to commence more rapidly and take advantage of existing expertise and lessons learned by the Rwanda tribunal,” the spokesman said.
Ambassador Michael Kozak, U.S. acting assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights and labour, is in Brussels this week to meet his EU counterparts..
“Participants will be preparing the upcoming United Nations Commission on Human Rights. The situation is Darfur is part of that discussion,” the spokesman said.
The disagreement over the Darfur case and the ICC threatens attempts from both sides of the Atlantic to mend relations following differences over the war in Iraq.
Daniel Keohane, senior research fellow for security and defence policy at the London-based Centre for European Reform think-tank says the timing of the disagreement could not be worse.
“This dispute will bring tensions to a head and the timing is awful for both sides – the Bush administration has said that it wants to rebuild transatlantic relations as does the EU, but this disagreement will just add to a number of issues which are already simmering beneath the surface such as the China arms embargo, Iran and future of Iraq,” he told IPS Wednesday.
Keohane says the ICC issue is particularly contentious because it is an issue of principle.
“The EU and U.S. agree on the other issues in principle – even on Iraq – but with the ICC it’s quite different because the U.S. and the EU are coming from a different ideological background,” he said. “There is the potential for a huge flare-up over this issue.”
While Keohane says the Sudan case should be referred to the ICC, he stresses that politics should not dominate the issue.
“The Sudan case is a classic example of exactly the type of case that the ICC should be addressing. But in the end what’s more important whether it’s an ad hoc court or the ICC is that the right people are brought to justice and that court works effectively,” he said. “We shouldn’t be arguing about politics – we should be talking about what’s happening in Sudan.”
Keohane thinks that ultimately the case will end up in the ad hoc court. “I think the U.S. will veto at the Security Council but there may be other ways around it,” he said.
The dispute also threatens to hamper an upcoming visit to the EU by U.S. officials.
U.S. secretary of state Condoleezza Rice begins her trip to several European capitals later this week, and Bush will visits Brussels Feb. 22 for a special summit with EU leaders.
Last month the U.S.-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) accused the Bush administration of creating a “deadly delay” by attempting to block the UN Security Council from handing the Darfur case to the ICC.
“The delay involved in setting up a new tribunal would only lead to the loss of more innocent lives in Darfur,” said Richard Dicker, director of the international justice programme at HRW.
“Since Sudan is not a party to the court, the ICC would require a referral from the Security Council. An ICC referral is the course of action that can best guarantee efficient and effective prosecution of those most responsible for these atrocities,” he added.
The Darfur conflict has pitted the government and Arab militias called the Janjaweed against two rebel groups consisting mainly of three African ethnic groups who are also Muslim.
Between 70,000 and 300,000 African Darfurese are estimated to have been killed and 1.5 million others made homeless in attacks by government-backed militias.