by Tony Cartalucci
May 23, 2012
Using standards provided by the International
Criminal Court (ICC) and based on the precedent set by the Nuremberg trials,
the tribunal succeeded in observing existing international standards in
reaching its verdict before forwarding the results to the ICC and
However, for those involved, they are under no illusions that the ICC or the UN will take actions against the accused.
As noted by Professor Michel Chossudovsky of the Centre for Research on Globalization, the very institutions charged with maintaining international rule of law, have been in fact instrumental in facilitating its violation by the hands of powerful Western nations.
Professor Chossudovsky stated,
Indeed, it is clear, as in Libya, genocidal terrorist organizations, stated as such on both US and British terror organization lists, were empowered by this very upturning of "international law," where baseless claims of "human rights" violations were not only used to accuse and undermine leaders of sovereign nation-states, but used to justify acts of war in deposing targeted governments.
In Libya, not only were militants led by terrorist organizations like the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group committing very real atrocities, but NATO itself did as well. Militants on the ground purposefully blockaded entire cities, cutting off food, water, electricity, and medical supplies while NATO flattened the city with daily airstrikes.
other words, NATO did demonstratively before the eyes of the world what it
accused the Libyan government of doing used to justify its military
intervention in the first place.
As Professor Chossudovsky has
illustrated, "international law" has clearly been turned upside down to the
benefit of real, demonstrative war criminals.
And while this is useful in and of itself, the tribunal and those involved,
by extending convictions beyond figure heads like George Bush and Richard
Cheney to include advisers and policy makers of corporate-funded
think-tanks, a wider network of criminality has been exposed as well.
should not even be expected. Instead, the tribunal should be understood in
the context as not only a form of protest, but the boycotting of a corrupt
system and the creation of a viable, more inclusive alternative. Legal
proceedings are designed to examine evidence and convict guilty parties,
then determining appropriate and practical punitive measures.
imprisonment may be the most ideal punishment to level against those
convicted in Malaysia, it is not currently practical.
Eventually, if the silent majority finds the resolve to
act on the tribunal's ruling,
and impose "sanctions" on the special
interests driving these criminal acts, and should this atmosphere of
impunity be eroded, imprisoning international war criminals may eventually
become a practical reality.