Thank You ICC: Charges Against Sudan's President Expected In the Future

Aimee Sobhani
Politics

After 5 years and 300,000 deaths, the Economist reports that the International Criminal Court (ICC) will bring present evidence against Sudan's president, Omar Al-Bashir. This move could result in Al-Bashir's indictment for war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity. This move shows exactly why the ICC is an important, necessary international body.

I've written in favor of the ICC before, and I strongly believe that the U.S. should take steps to join the Court. A belief that is central to liberal political theory is that one way that "world peace" may be achieved is through involvement in international organizations. This concept is very simple: international organizations force states to work together, thus lessening the likelihood of war.

Currently, the United States is not part of the ICC. Clinton was apprehensive about joining the organization because he thought it might undermine the Constitution, and Bush totally opposes American participation in the Court. This fear partially stems from the fact that if an American commits a heinous crime, he or she might be subject to the ICC's jurisdiction instead of the jurisdiction of the American court. However, this fear is unfounded, mainly due to the fact that it is unlikely that someone raised with American values would commit a crime so severe that he or she would end up in front of the ICC. In addition, the ICC only has jurisdiction over an American criminal if it deems that proceedings in an American court were lacking in some way--also unlikely given the sophistication of the American judicial system.

If America chooses to join the ICC, the organization could be strengthened significantly. Though the U.S. is losing popularity because of some its policy decisions, there is no doubt that the U.S. is still one of the most powerful nations in the world. If we join the ICC, we will be able to influence the Court's decisions and the rules that govern it. There doesn't seem to be anything negative about that.

Never fear, though. Barack Obama is a supporter of the ICC and internationalism in general so it is possible that the United States will be involved in the ICC in the near future.

Did Obama Betray Us?

Soo-Ryum Yang
Politics

"All too often our politics still seems trapped in these old, threadbare arguments – a fact most evident during our recent debates about the war in Iraq, when those who opposed administration policy were tagged by some as unpatriotic, and a general providing his best counsel on how to move forward in Iraq was accused of betrayal"

Barack Obama 6/30/2008

Nearly a year after MoveOn.org's infamous "General Betray Us" flop, Obama has decisively spoken against the group's controversial attack on the military leadership in Iraq. But, don't expect his comments to spark "Obama Betrayed Us" ads in NYT. He is still the Left's only hope.

It is obvious that the group's ad was cruelly mischaracterized. However, it was very hard not to mischaracterize the ad's claim. It was more like giving the Right carte blanche rather than providing ourselves the platform to discuss important issues. Essentially, it had a good idea but very very bad wording.

Sure, by equating MoveOn.org's tactics with those of the Bush gang, Obama might lose some support of those anti-war activists from Vermont and Berkeley, but this stratgey might work in the end, especially if he wants to win Virginia and Ohio.

Despite his post-partisan rhetoric, his voting record puts him in the far left corner- where the majority of Americans would feel uncomfortable. By denouncing extremist politics, he will only appear not only more centrist, but more likable, and thus be more electable.

MoveOn.org can now do what it's best at. Just move on.