As I See It :An Analysis and Critique of US Journalists Nicholas Kristof, Faith McDonnell Rob Schwarzwalder Illegal Visit to the Nuba Mountains (4)
As I see it, it is no surprised that the US journalists and the US lawmakers, these days could illegally enter into Sudan free at will and without any authorization from the immigration authorities for formal documentations, issued of entry permits and Entry Visas as required by law, but decided to bulldoze their illegal entry into the Republic of Sudan through the back alley or the back door of the failed Apartheid banana republic of South Sudan. The visits were, nonetheless, intended for the search of culture of peace and security, but astutely and purposely for a different hidden agenda to destabilize the African nation of Sudan. The Western world is not yet satisfied with the partitioned of the country in 2011.
As I see it now, all the Nuer religious Prophets by their very nature and through Prophets Nyundeng, Dieu and Nyamatti (Nyaruach Kulang), they have all called for social justice, equality and brotherhood of all mankind for all God’s children. Both Islam and the Nuer Religion, however, have been religions of democracy because they both make no distinctions against humankind on the basis of race, color, creed, gender and national origin. The malicious allegations recently uttered by the US Congressman Frank Wolf (R-VA) who illegally entered Sudan in violation of Sudan laws and international laws, claimed that President Al-Bashir has been recognized as a war criminal, instituted a campaign of “ethnic cleansing, mass murder and rape, all carried out by uniformed soldiers of the Khartoum government”. Let us be serious on these malicious and absurd alleged crimes against Sudanese President Al Bashir. First, there was neither substantive legal evident to ascertain that the President Al Bashir committed such crimes or had he ordered anyone to commit them. Secondly, such allegations were all fabricated and politically motivated rather than legal. Therefore, President Al Bashir of the Republic of Sudan from the legal point of view, is still presumed to be innocent person under the presumption of innocence and the due process of the law and until otherwise proven guilty or pleaded guilty before his peers. For the time being, for the American media should refrain from castigating, vilifying and not to prematurely criminalize an innocent person and then called Sudanese leader as a war criminal, would be unjustifiable and contrary to the spirit of the law because there is no evident to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he (President Al-Bashir) has, in fact, committed such serious alleged crimes or as an accomplice to such alleged crimes in Darfur Crisis since its eruption in 2003.
Without the shadow of a doubt, such allegations painted negatively on the President of the Republic of Sudan as a war criminal were fabricated or manufactured and based on the reports filed by the NGOs in Darfur during the peak of the crisis. The so-called neo-colonial Court otherwise known as the ICC indictment was not sufficient to castigate, vilify and criminalize and to label him (Al Bashir) an innocent person as a criminal is illegal and unjustifiable. Certainly, let us leave for a bit the humble and one of the most reasonable, generous, popular, courageous and a devout Muslim that could not venture or give orders to kill his own people compared to the UK PM Tony Blair and the US President George Bush, genocide, war crimes and against humanity committed by the US and its NATO Allies criminal activities around the world beginning with emphasis on the illegal invasion and occupation of the Arab Republic of Iraq in 2003 under the UN Security Council resolution 1441 masterminded by Western powers to destroyed the Iraqi people and its progressive economic infrastructure up to the murdered of the late President Saddam Hussein who was also built by the American themselves for years even up to the time of invasion and occupation of Kuwait and then followed by the Desert Shield War in 2001. Another case similar to Iraq was Afghanistan in post-September 11, 2001, invasion and occupation of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan to topple and destroy the conjoint Al-Qaida-Taliban led administration in Kabul. From both physical and infrastructural destruction in both Iraq and Afghanistan, who would be responsible for such a massive burdens? Who is going to charge the former US President George W. Bush and the former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair on the ICC in The Hague, The Netherlands? Fact, the US journalists known firsthand that neither PM Blair nor the US President George Bush could not be charged nor indicted by the ICC because according to the Charter of Rome neither the UK Prime Ministers nor the US Presidents could be indicted by the ICC because the Court was designed not to indict and trial the UK PMs and the US Presidents or any sitting heads of state and governments of the NATO member states.
It was a court specifically designed to deal with the downgrade African leaders and the Third World regarded as sub-humans, savages and uncivilized to be civilized by the ICC because their lives and actions by virtue of the Court designed are not equal or below the white folks standards through the mock public trials in The Hague, The Netherlands. This is the legal and logical point that that we need to raise for the Afro-Arab leaders to critically, empirically, epistemologically and to psychoanalyze the intentions and thinking about other precautionary measures. What kind of a Court that could not indict or charge the UK PMs and the US Presidents, including other white leaders? The question that we need to probe is this: why should any Afro-Arab or Third world countries wish to become member states of this bias or prejudice and partial court that distinguish and discriminate people on the bias of the skinned color or pigmentation? The most tenable and reasonable alternative (TRA) that Afro-Arab countries and the Non-Aligned nations or the G-77 should do would be to withdraw without any preconditions or quid pro-quos to kiss the ICC membership goodbye either to demise or reform to become a court that could administer social justice, equality and human rights protection for heads of state and governments rather dwelling on the African leaders in particular. Should the ICC changes to become a credible court that would render justice to all leaders on equal basis, then, it could become a functional rather than a dysfunctional court that have the powers to indict the UK PMs and the US Presidents, including others in the foreseeable future. The international community should know and underscore that evil actions of the UK PM Tony Blair and the US President George Bush were above the law and because nobody lives or is above the law because we all live under the law, the former UK and US leaders should be indicted like President Charles Taylor of Liberia. This is the bottom line. Who is going to charge Israeli crimes constantly committed against the Palestinian Arabs? Faith Mc Donnell should know and underscore that the so-called ICC is a politically motivated court rather than a legally motivated court and we could agree more with the former Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary Robin Cook that “The ICC is a court set up not to bring to book Primes Ministers of the United Kingdom or Presidents of the United States”. Legally and logically, this is the basis on which we could not agree more with the German philosopher Goethe that “Distrust in whom the urge to punish is strong”. From the point of view or the frame of reference (worldview) of international relations and international laws amongst nation-states and written already in the books by the doyen international jurists, i.e., Georg Schwarzenegger in the late 1940s, critically observed that international lawyers suffered from what he called the “Professional disease against which other members of the legal profession are remarkably immune”. The thesis of the argument was that they [international lawyers] from an over-zealous legal evangelism that failed to distinguish between doing the right and commendable values, existing realities and those who truly believe in the existence of international laws.
As I see it, the ICC, per se, and lawyers that occupy its ivory towers in The Hague, The Netherlands, they should first seek coming to terms with the disaster that the ICC has created ever since its inception and they should disagree with Schwarzenegger’s early warnings in conjunction with his eloquent observation from one of the so-called ICC’s most enthusiastic supporters, Professor William Schabas, who was a participant observer in the creation of the ICC, candidly admits and/or concludes that “ The final version of the Rome Statute [establishing the ICC] was not without serious flaws”. Succinctly, this loop hole or what Professor David Hole, the author of “The ICC: Europe’s Guantanamo Bay” (2010) calls it the “irreparable hole in the heart of the ICC since its establishment in 2002”. In short, the combination of the legal evangelism and a seriously flawed statute is a fatal death wish that makes the ICC as an institution intrinsically flawed from the inception has been unclear, vague and so given the power, authority and the credibly to deal with delicate international issues with which the ICC had no capacity, gusts and gusto to deal with in the first place. Vividly, the ICC would claim to trace its roots to the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg that tried the defeated and surrendered senior Nazi officers branded as war criminals by the victors at the end of the war in 1945.
Actually, one thing was clear though, the Nuremberg trials did not lead to the UN proposals for a permanent criminal court. Nevertheless, if such a wholesome idea was true or not, it was shelved or stalled because of the then intense East-West ideological confrontation or the Cold War from 1945-1989, that changed the international geopolitics of bi-polarize to mono-polarize. Therefore, the whole idea of the ICC was resuscitated and tabled for consideration by the tiny Caribbean countries of Trinidad and Tobago at the 44th session of the UN General Assembly in 1989. In 1993, the UN Security Council controlled, dominated and manipulated by the Western powers permanent member states as their third foreign ministry in that body established an ad hoc court, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), which was then followed by the International Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and then tribunals for East Timor, Sierra Leone and Cambodia. The UN General Assembly at its 52nd session decided to convene the “United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of International Criminal Court”, which was held in Rome, Italy, from June 15 to 17 July 1998, to finalize and adopt a convention on the establishment of an international court”. On 17 July 1998, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) was adopted by 120 to 7, with 21 countries abstaining. Seven (7) countries voted against the treaty: Iraq, Israel, Libya, and the People Republic of China (PRC), Qatar, the United States of America (USA) and Arab Republic of Yemen. After 60 ratifications by April 20002, the Treaty of Rome became legal on 1 July 2002, for those who had signed up. There is no evidence that the ICC should only focus on Africa because its intentions were to deal effectively with all international criminal issues across the board. The shift in the ICC to focus only on African leaders was not the sole purpose and the hidden agenda behind the establishment of the ICC because Europe wanted to cleanse itself from the past colonial crimes it committed in Africa and to carry them forward to modern African leaders to branding them before the world community and the big powers as being the bad guys and they (Europeans) were (and are) the good guys. Funny wasn’t it? In fact, it was European colonialism and the Europeanization of the world that created all the pending problems in the world and Africa in particular. The first genocide or the Holocaust in the 20th century was committed by Kaiser’s notorious Lt.-General Van Thoretta against more than 700,000 Ovambu people in Northern Namibia and Europe put that crime against humanity under the carpet or rug and never to be taught in schools, colleges and universities because they do not want the new generations in Africa and the world to discover the past European crimes against humanity in Africa.
However, researchers, academics and experts on African affairs have unraveled the Germany genocide or the crime without a name in the former German Southwest Africa (Namibia) of the African Holocaust in the 20th century of more than 700,000 Ovamabu people of Northern Namibia from 1903-1908. The Germany colonial power could not care less nor apologized about what happened to the people of Namibia because they valued the African lives to be less than that of a German or a European. In fact, all European colonial powers would be happy if they had the magical powers to exterminate all the black folks on the face of this planet-Earth; they would not a bit hesitate to execute such powers. The brutalities under apartheid in South Africa, Nazis extermination or the final solution against the Jewish folks in Europe, the British brutalities committed by the British colonial Armed forces and the Royal Air Force against the Nuer nation and its people during the 30-year Anglo-Nuer War (1900s-1930s) otherwise known as the Rebellion or the Al-Soura’a Al-Nuer in South Sudan was a deliberated and well calculated genocide and extermination of the Nuer folks compared to the atrocities committed by the British colonial forces against the Mau-Mau Detainees in the era of the armed struggle for independence in the East African nation of Kenya were clear examples and testimonial proves that the colonial powers never ever reckoned that the souls of the black folks are equal to those of the white folks and segregation, racism and racialism in America against the African-Americans for more than five centuries and still goes on have been clear cases to cite. By nature, white folks are naturally afraid of the black folks and this is not a racist epithet, political gimmick, but a classic sociological and philosophical reality. I have lived and studied in America and Europe, I do reckon that white intelligentsia majority of whom never had any contacts with black or people of colored do believe that they have the capacity to become creative and intelligence to reasons. Therefore, it does not matter how much you profess to know, a great majority of the whites do believe that all people of colored, namely Asian, Arab and Africans do not have the same mental capacity compared to the whites to make logical, decisive decision-making, corporate management and intellectual judgments.
By Professor David de Chand, 14/05/2012