Europeans resist US call for UN immunity
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Leaked documents show that America is seeking wide-ranging immunity for its troops on United Nations missions, especially in the former Yugoslavia, from prosecution before the new International Criminal Court.
One of two resolutions presented to the UN Security Council would guarantee that "current and former" UN forces did not have to face an international tribunal, and this "immunity shall continue after termination of their participation in the operation for all such acts".
The widely held view is that if the Security Council adopted the US resolutions, the International Criminal Court (ICC) would be severely under-mined before it began its life next week.
Diplomatic sources say the US administration has warned that a failure by the Security Council to pass the resolutions could lead to Washington drastically reducing its 27 per cent contribution to the UN's peace-keeping budget and withdrawing its troops from international peace-keeping duties.
Britain, one of the leading proponents of the ICC is, in particular, under intense pressure from Washington to vote for the resolutions, according to the sources. A change of stance by London, it is believed, would lead to France and other members of the council softening their opposition.
The vote to continue the mandate for the UN force in Bosnia, due to be held last Friday, has been put back while the Security Council discusses the proposals, and is now expected to take place at the weekend.
The American proposals, introduced by Richard William-son, its ambasssador to the UN for political affairs, offer two options. The first would include all UN missions. It states "that current and former officials and personnel from a contributing state ... shall enjoy, except in the territory of the contributing state, immunity from arrest, detention and prosecution with respect to all acts arising out of such operations and that this immunity shall continue after termination of their participation for all such acts". The second draft resolution makes the same proposals, but restricts it to the force for Bosnia.
The ICC, the world's first permanent war crimes tribunal, formally comes into effect on 1 July. The statute has been signed by 139 states and ratified by 69, including Britain.
Human rights groups have reacted with alarm to the American moves.Amnesty International said last night: "The US government is proposing wording which would sabotage the achievements of those who had fought so strongly to obtain justice for victims of human rights violations."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments