PERILS OF AMERICAN HYPOCRISY

 

Our national security now depends on Civil Rights. - EJ Dionne Jr

 

America’s failing to adequately uphold Democratic institutions and uphold Human Rights at home deepens the United States’ credibility deficit and weakens its effectiveness as a champion of these values abroad.

 

And this has serious National Security implications, because we know - from hard data and grim experience - that Americans are safer when Democracies set the rules of a Global order. But when the United States ceases to be a Democracy in good standing and allows the abuse of its own people by Elected and Appointed Public Officials and Employees and extremist groups, then vital credibility is lost and may never be recovered.

 

Worse, America’s adversaries will use this hypocrisy to discredit the United States in the Global struggle of ideas or believe they can get away with misadventures such as Russia invading Ukraine.

 

There’s a deeper and more direct security threat posed by America’s failure to live up to its ideals at home. Societal divisions that result from systemic racism and other Human Rights violations left to fester, combined with weak institutions seemingly incapable of addressing these challenges, make the United States not just a weaker champion but also a weaker Nation, increasingly vulnerable to attacks of all kinds from those with a different vision of the world.

 

Minnesota US Representative Ilhan Omar recently pushed the US House of Representations to pass a Resolution urging the United States to "become a full Member of the International Criminal Court" as Russia's brutal invasion of Ukraine rages on.

 

The Democratic Congresswoman said she has "recoiled in horror at reports of massacres, targeting of civilians, mass graves and rapes by Russian forces."

 

The International Criminal Court (ICC), which is in The Hague, can prosecute individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and the crime of aggression.

 

Omar says the ICC does not have the power to Investigate Russia for what judges at the Nuremberg trials after World War II called the "supreme International crime." The Hague believes the crime of aggression - the Decision to wage a ruthless, unprovoked war against another Country - would be the easiest way to hold the Russians accountable.

 

Recently, Ukraine took matters into its own hands and held a War Crimes Trial under International Law against a Russian Soldier and convicted him. While this may be unorthodox and may cause the Russians to reciprocate against Ukrainian Soldiers, it was a reminder of how badly the International Community just rise to the occasion and seriously uphold International Law in all its facets no matter what the cost.

 

SVC’s President & CEO, Phil Sutton, who is the Primary Author of the International Responsibility To Protect Statutes, knows this is a mistaken viewpoint. In theory, Representative Omar’s concern that Russia and its President cannot be brought to Justice because Russia is not a signatory to the Statutes of Rome, which created the International Criminal Court in 2003, has merit. But the fact of it is that International Law is not a choice of each Nation to heed or not.

 

President Sutton says it is incredibly convenient for any Nation to simply disregard any International Law it pleases. This was the early attitude American Southerners had towards maintaining slavery and that their State Legislatures could simply “nullify” US Federal Law if it didn’t suit them. Almost 650,000 Americans died in a four-year long civil war to settle the matter. Is war always the way such matters must be settled?

 

That is why the International Rule of Law exists and must be adhered to by every Nation whether it wants to or not and there be no loopholes. Recognition of International Law’s existence and enforcement is the key.

 

-SVC TRAILBLAZER PUBLICATIONS COMMENTARY GROUP FOREIGN WRITERS & JOURNALISTS