USA Town Hall: Your Information Source On Threats To The US Constitution & Our Sovereignty.at Arm's Length

USA Town Hall

To translate this page from English to Chinese, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese or Spanish enter the URL here.

(GOP) Platform Holds U.N. at Arms Length

Mary Jo Anderson

August 03, 2000

Republicans Plot New Course for Relationship With World Body

PHILADELPHIA -- Stating boldly that the United Nations can exercise "no veto over principled American leadership" and that "American troops must never serve under United Nations command," the GOP platform unveiled in Philadelphia this week describes a very different view of the relationship between the United States and the United Nations than that of the Clinton-Gore administration.

While acknowledging that the United Nations can organize humanitarian aid efforts and serve as a "forum for nations to peacefully resolve their differences," the Republican platform stipulates that the U.N. was "not designed to summon or lead armies."

Other specific issues addressed by the platform include the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, U.S. dues payments to the U.N., environmental treaties and U.S. funding of international programs providing abortion as part of health care.

Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., an outspoken critic of the International Criminal Court, and Sen. Ashcroft, R-Mo., have raised concerns about the incompatibility of the ICC's jurisdiction and the constitutional rights of Americans, particularly military personnel. The statute for the creation of the International Criminal Court was established July 17,1998, in Rome to form a permanent world tribunal to try individuals for international crimes.

The ICC becomes operative once 60 nations have ratified the treaty. And more than a hundred nations have already signed the treaty in anticipation of having their national governments begin the ratification process that incorporates ICC provisions into domestic law.

Though international pressure for the U.S. to agree to the Court is intensifying - several allies have recently ratified the treaty, including Canada, which did so in July -- the U.S. has neither signed nor ratified the treaty.

Helms, who views the treaty as a danger to U.S. sovereignty and promised the treaty would be "dead on arrival" unless the United States held veto power, introduced the American Service Member Protection Act to the Senate last week, a measure designed to preempt international efforts to try U.S. soldiers. In June, Helms introduced legislation that prohibits U.S. cooperation with the Court and forbids ICC investigations in any territory under the jurisdiction of the United States.

According to John L. Washburn, co-chairman of the Washington Working Group on the International Criminal Court, the Republican platform provision on the ICC is "based on a misconception."

A coalition of 15 non-governmental organizations, the Washington Working Group is an educational and advocacy body whose efforts are aimed at U.S. congressmen. Washburn, a graduate of Harvard Law School, has served in the United States Foreign Service and in the office of the Secretary General of the United Nations under Javier Perez de Cuellar. He points out that the assumption "implicit in the GOP platform is that the ICC would have jurisdiction over the U.S. government or military personnel as a group." Another misconception, he said, is that nations that are not a party to the treaty would fall under the venue of the ICC. Instead, he said, the ICC incorporates the Nuremberg Principle that prosecutes individuals.

"At issue is not the nationality," he said, "but the person's individual responsibility for the very worst of international crimes."

Others, however, disagree, claiming non-party nations would not be beyond the reach of the ICC.

Kenneth Gallant, professor of Law at the University of Arkansas School of Law, explains, "If a non-signatory nation refuses to cooperate, a case can be brought to the Court by the U.N. Security Council under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter. By virtue of their membership in the U.N. -- and nearly every nation is a member -- states and their citizens are subject to a case brought to the ICC by the Security Council."

The U.S. veto power on the Security Council is also considered an insufficient safeguard in light of current discussions about ending the veto power altogether.

Although most Americans believe International Criminal Court prosecutions will be reserved for war crimes, an official U.N. information brochure says otherwise: "A decision has yet to be made as to whether the definition of crimes against humanity contained in the Statute will also include such acts when committed in peacetime. In this regard, the Yugoslavia Tribunal stated, 'It is by now a settled rule of customary international law that crimes against humanity do not require a connection to international armed conflict.' "

Those concerned with American sovereignty issues point to a concern for how terms are defined. The crimes under the International Criminal Court's domain include genocide and "crimes against humanity," "aggression," "sexual slavery" and "enforced pregnancy." The ICC treaty, which will have the power to enforce U.N.-mandated social policies worldwide, was greeted by United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan as "a giant step forward in the march towards universal human rights and the rule of law."

But Richard G. Wilkins, professor of law at Brigham Young University, warns that "malleable definitions" and disagreements about what constitutes "human rights" are areas of significant dispute.

The GOP platform acknowledges some of those areas in its pledge to "protect the rights of families in international programs and [we] will not fund organizations involved in abortions." Pamela Shifman serves as co-executive director of the New York-based Equality Now, an advocacy group that "supports the United Nations international human rights efforts for women, such as the Beijing [conference] and Beijing+5 process."

Shifman's organization, an NGO at the United Nations, is "strongly supportive of the establishment of an International Criminal Court" and sees the U.N. as a "mechanism important to the advocacy of the human rights agenda." While Equality Now was "very glad to see the GOP specifically mention sex trafficking [as a crime], we were very disappointed that they [GOP platform] will not fund abortions, because that hurts millions of women around the world."

Other issues in the platform that draw a new Republican vision of the U.S.-U.N. relationship include the prickly matter of dues owed by the United States to the U.N., as well as matters of stewardship over the environment.

On the dues question, the platform calls for a "fair, not disproportionate share of the dues," to be paid to the U.N., "once it has reformed its management and taken steps to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse." The monies the U.S. has contributed toward peacekeeping missions would also be credited toward U.S. dues.

The GOP opposition to U.N. control of the global environment is a strongly worded provision: "We reject the extremist call for the United Nations to create a 'Stewardship Council' modeled on the Security Council, to oversee the global environment." The platform cites attempts of "international bureaucrats" to "by-pass" the "processes of national governments."

Gregory Gronbacher of the Grand Rapids, Mich.-based Acton Institute cites international accords on environmental issues, such as the Kyoto protocols, as an example of U.N. attempts to control how nations use their resources. An educational foundation, the Institute advises religious leaders on the moral importance of limited government and a free market economy.

Gronbacher, Acton's director of academic research, observes, "The Clinton administration has signed treaties that many Americans are not comfortable with. Some of the U.N. conference and treaty requirements are morally problematical with the founding principles of our nation."

Gronbacher added, "It appears Bush will take issues of national sovereignty and the will of the American people into consideration before signing treaties which place U.S. resources at the disposal of international bureaucrats."

Mary Jo Anderson is a contributing reporter to WorldNetDaily

Commerce Connections ® is a division of: The OAKIPOSA Business Group ®