- cross-posted to:
- news@beehaw.org
- cross-posted to:
- news@beehaw.org
Joining court would allow investigation of Xi Jinping if he were to order act of war against Taiwan
Taiwan’s government is considering joining the international criminal court, in part to increase deterrence of a Chinese attack or invasion.
Supporters also say it would help universalise the international legal system, which has a low presence in Asia, and increase Taiwan’s global participation at a time when Beijing works to keep it as isolated as possible.
The court was established by the Rome statute, which defined four core international crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression. It has operated since 2002, prosecuting dozens of alleged war criminals. In March the ICC issued an arrest warrant for the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, over the forced deportation of children from Ukraine.
This is the same ICC that the United States, Russia, China, and India are all not party to?
The same ICC that Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Singapore, Laos, Myanmar, and Brunei are all not party to?
I guess Taiwan can join the illustrious list of signatories in the East/Southeast Asia region: Cambodia, Thailand, South Korea, Japan, and Timor-Leste.
Yeah, would be better to have those countries be members. Still don’t you think it’s significant that all of Europe, South America and half of Africa are participants? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court
Meanwhile most of Southeast Asia and the Middle East are not. What, exactly, is your point?
Maybe read the article? It explicitly says why doing it in Asia would be beneficial.
By accepting the one country in the region without UN representation? Surely, that’ll benefit the legitimacy of the body.
The US has literally stated under the 2002 Supplemental Appropriations Act for Further Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States that they will invade The Hague if the ICC detains any American citizen or citizen of an America-allied country (of which there are many).
The ICC is a joke. The reason the ICC has seen adoption in Europe, Australia, Japan, and South Korea is because, well, they’re America-allied countries and effectively immune from prosecution.
He made his point clear. He asked you if you think the members that are included are significant. Clearly you don’t, but you could just say so instead of replying with a passive aggressive question.
Imagine supporting not making it harder to get away with genocide because some other countries don’t.
Like of all the reasons peer pressure wasn’t what I would have expected.
There’s already a UN body to handle disputes between states: the International Court of Justice. The ICC’s primary role is to prosecute individuals, not states.
Well it says in italics right at top Joining court would allow investigation of Xi Jinping if he were to order act of war against Taiwan so prosecuting individuals is probably what they had in mind.
The ICC is a failure even within its jurisdiction, so I’m not sure what your point is.
The US has literally stated under the 2002 Supplemental Appropriations Act for Further Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States that they will invade The Hague if the ICC detains any American citizen or citizen of an America-allied country (of which there are many).
What individuals can the ICC prosecute? It can’t prosecute any American or any American ally (most of Europe, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Canada, much of South America) without getting “liberated” by military action. Who’s a party to the ICC again?
The UN doesn’t recognize Tiawan’s statehood.