Global Policy Forum

By Evelyn Leopold

The United States may not have enough U.N. votes to exempt American soldiers from prosecution by a new global criminal court, with China now questioning the action in view of the prison scandal in Iraq, diplomats said on Thursday.

A Security Council draft resolution designed to put U.S. peacekeepers out of the reach of the International Criminal Court expires on July 1. A renewal was delayed last week by China and it is expected to go before the council again after a resolution on Iraq's transition is adopted.

Two years ago the council voted unanimously in favor of the measure when the Bush administration began to veto U.N. peacekeeping missions after members hesitated. Last year three nations abstained but this year there are enough abstentions that could bring the resolution perilously close to defeat. A minimum of nine votes in favor is needed for adoption in the 15-member council.

Brazil, Spain, France and Germany have signaled they would abstain and Chile, Romania and Benin as well as China are considering it. But some diplomats said the resolution would squeak through because no one wanted to see Washington kill U.N. peacekeeping missions. "The British say they are holding their noses and voting for it and others may do the same," said one envoy. But China's position is an unusual one as Beijing has neither ratified nor signed the treaty establishing the court.

'A VERY BAD SIGNAL'

Several diplomats said that China was bargaining with the United States over Taiwan's status in the World Trade Organization, one of the few international bodies that admit both Beijing and Taipei.

However, China's U.N. ambassador, Wang Guangya, denied this was the case and said the resolution was sending "a very bad signal at this time," especially to Iraq. He told Reuters the U.S. abuse of Iraqi prisoners raised the need for "strict observance of international law." The resolution, he said, was a signal that "whatever you are doing, you are being protected by the Security Council."

"So we find it difficult to say 'yes' to this resolution," Wang said. "The United States has difficulties with ICC. We also have difficulties, but from different points of view."

The Bush administration argues that the tribunal, based in The Hague, Netherlands, could be used for politically motivated law suits against far-flung American soldiers. Supporters say the court's statutes exclude countries with a proper judicial system, like the United States, from prosecution.

"The language agreed upon two years ago embodies a fair but hard-fought compromise that allows us to participate in U.N. peacekeeping operations, while protecting our personnel serving in these operations," said Richard Grenell, spokesman for U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte.

The court, the first permanent global war crimes tribunal, was set up to prosecute the world's worst atrocities, such as genocide, mass war crimes and systematic human rights abuses.

Specifically, the U.S. draft resolution would place any soldier or official out of the court's reach from any nation if they served on missions established or authorized by the United Nations. This would apply to those from countries that did not ratify the 1998 treaty creating the court.

Of the 15 Security Council members, Britain, France, Germany, Spain, Brazil, Romania and Benin are among 94 nations that have ratified the 1998 treaty creating the court. Russia, Chile, Angola, Algeria and the Philippines, are among 135 nations that signed the treaty. China and Pakistan have neither signed nor ratified and the Bush administration rescinded the U.S. signature.