|
|
Dear Mr. President, The administration is currently conducting a high-level policy review of the International Criminal Court, and opinions on the subject are presented across a wide spectrum. Options range from a do-nothing (status quo) choice on one end to a global anti-ratification campaign alternative on the other. I am writing you today to express my opinion on this important matter. While much of the international community believes the International Criminal Court will be an important advance for the cause of international justice, many American officials have expressed that the Rome Statute lacks sufficient safeguards to protect U.S. servicemen and women from superfluous prosecutions. Although the former President Clinton ratified the statute before leaving office, this administration could withdraw the signature with a letter of request to the UN’s Security General. Surely withdrawal is possible, but is it beneficial? US negotiators have made and continue to make great strides in improving various aspects of the statute. Although there are still areas of legitimate concern, I would hardly call them flaws. As a signatory to the treaty, the US is bound not to work against the purposes and objectives of the treaty, General Powell confirmed. The US signature however does not bind us to support the existing standards, but requires us to improve upon them. Withdrawing the US signature is voiding American concerns, influence, and right to participate in the ICC’s construction. The Court will be made with or without US consent.
|
