America in Wonderland

By Katharine Salem

I’m sure that many Americans were shocked and awed by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his patently absurd reference to the Fourth Geneva Convention in regard to the American POWs. I’m not sure how the man manages to keep a straight face during his speeches. Perhaps that’s why he’s often seen darting away from the cameras. President George W. Bush also could not help but offer his own share of non sequitur logic and commented that if Iraq is holding POWs then he expects them to be treated well.

What are we talking about here people? Was it not just March 20, 2003 that the US finally resolved to defy and disregard international law, as was the plan from the start? The US has its own track record of torturing people in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, along with an incredible track record of disregarding and violating international laws.

With all of the absurdity, lies and deception, I feel like I'm trapped in Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland. Seeing his beady eyes behind the spectacles, I would not be surprised if Donald Rumsfeld morphed into the White Rabbit as he scurries away from the cameras. The military would morph into a deck of cards, feverishly painting the roses red. Suddenly, George W. Bush -- the Queen of Hearts -- would appear yelling, "Off with their heads!" Meanwhile, we the people become Alice -- bewildered and lost in a dream world of deceptions. Indeed, things keep getting "curiouser and curiouser." Tony Blair would serve nicely as the Mad Hatter having his tea party. And who would be the Cheshire Cat? Ah yes, the media. The grinning Cheshire Cat who delights in leading Alice astray, and frequently lacks any substance at all.

Bush and his cabinet have grown quite comfortable with dodging requests for evidence to back up their war plans. Rumsfeld is visibly annoyed by the pesky questions about how long he thinks the war will last. It’s understandable – how many times does he have to say, “I don’t know”? But amidst the intoxicating speeches and enthralling game of hide-the-ball (is there even a ball?), has anyone stopped to ponder some possible resulting scenarios?

For example, what if the UN declares that the actions of the US are illegal? Russia is asking the UN to decide this now. Is the US willing to thumb its nose at the UN some more? Seems like publicly extolling the virtues of international laws and conventions as a reason to invade Iraq, and then turning around to berate and defy those same laws in order to invade Iraq was already far-reaching. The hypocrisy apparently evaded Rumsfeld, as he felt it appropriate to cite the Fourth Geneva Convention even after this defiance.

But wait, there’s another possible pitfall …

What if the International Court of Justice rules against Ariel Sharon, finding him guilty of war crimes? This would set a judicial precedent of convicting leaders guilty of war crimes even while they are still in power. In the future, could it be possible for a US President to be convicted of war crimes? Perish the thought! Holding US leaders accountable for their actions would be such a dirty maneuver. Our leaders already hate the idea of the ICJ and the newly established International Criminal Court (ICC), as well as the prospect of holding individuals accountable for war crimes committed by the State. If the ICJ can convict Sharon and then Bush comes under fire, I’m sure some people out there will claim that advocating adherence to the UN and international laws is downright unpatriotic.

In fact, it’s already happening.

March 11, 2003 marked the launch of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, despite fierce resistance by the US. Although the ICC descends from the Nuremberg trials that followed WWII, it is strongly opposed by the US government.

The American Servicemembers’ Protection Act (ASPA) came into effect on August 2, 2002. The ASPA prohibits any US “agency or entity” from cooperating with the ICC. Additionally, it prohibits US military assistance to any countries that are parties to the statute of the ICC, restricts US participation in UN peacekeeping, and authorizes the President to use “all means necessary” to free any US or allied personnel from captivity or held on behalf of the ICC. Apparently these bullying tactics are proving successful, as more than 20 countries have signed immunity agreements that exempt all US citizens from the authority of the ICC.

Apart from the ASPA and the actions of the Bush administration, legislation that has lately been put before Congress is further evidence of the blatant disregard for international law. For example, the American Sovereignty Restoration Act would end US membership in the UN and remove diplomatic immunity for UN employees while in the US. Yet another bill before Congress -- the United Nations Voting Accountability Act -- would prohibit foreign aid to countries that continually vote contrary to US opinion on issues in the General Assembly. So much for the ruse of loving democracy.

Through this muddled mess of absurdity, is it possible for Alice to wake up from her dream? Start to remember how the UN was formed, and how international human rights laws first came into place. It was after World War II, and the bloodshed of thousands. As one of the Allies, the US was a major contributor in leading the way to creating international laws that would be adhered to in order to prevent future atrocities like WWII. The Allies had a tough time presenting their case against the individual Nazis at the Nuremberg trials. The reason was because there was not a clear judicial precedent of international human rights law that would have implicated the Third Reich. The Nazis first argued that the court set up by the Allies lacked jurisdiction. They also argued that they were individuals acting on behalf of their State, and that their actions during the war had been in defense of that State. Preemptive attacks … aggressive attacks … invading attacks … in defense of the State.

Despite the questionable judicial precedence, the Court ruled that the individual Nazis could be held accountable for their actions under their State. After the Nuremberg trials, the UN charter was formed, and true international laws were created.

We must remember the bloodshed that led to the creation of these laws, which are today so quickly disregarded as a nuisance. The international laws and legal system have an important purpose – to maintain order and justice. If these laws have been reduced to mere words on paper, then will more bloodshed be necessary, only to produce more words on paper? When will it end? We must act now to enforce the international laws that are currently in place.

It’s time to remember history and see the truth. It’s time to wake up.