Join News Letter

Iraq War

Peak Oil

Climate Change

US Imperialism

Palestine

Communalism

Gender/Feminism

Dalit

Globalisation

Humanrights

Economy

India-pakistan

Kashmir

Environment

Gujarat Pogrom

WSF

Arts/Culture

India Elections

Archives

Links

Submission Policy

Contact Us

Fill out your
e-mail address
to receive our newsletter!
 

Subscribe

Unsubscribe

 

What To Do With The War Criminals Of The Myanmar’s SPDC Regime

By Habib Siddiqui

16 November, 2006
Countercurrents.org

The important matter concerning what to do with the war criminals that victimize civilian population has been hotly debated for the last few years, especially after the invasion of Iraq by the USA and the UK. Many human rights activists are on the opinion that the warlords of our world need to be tried for their crimes against humanity. A few years ago, therefore, there were cases filed in the European courts against some war criminals, including Ariel Sharon of Israel for the massacre of Palestinians in Jenin, Palestine. Fearing their imminent arrest if they had stepped onto European soil, some of the Israeli generals did not land and returned to Israel.

Even the US Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld was sued a couple of years ago in Germany on similar charges, including crimes at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay Prisons, etc. The US (unilateral) law, however, exempts trying government officials and its armed forces from being tried outside or extradited for war crimes in courts like The Hague. Interestingly, among western countries, the USA is the only country that has not accepted the jurisdiction of the ICJ in The Hague to try its own war criminals, although, rather hypocritically she has no problem having other monsters like the late Slobodan Milosevic of Yugoslavia or Hutu leaders of Rwanda tried there.

As long as Rumsfeld was serving as the Secretary, German law could not do much to arresting him when he visited the German bases. But today, I heard in the National Public Radio that some cases have again been filed in Germany, including reviving old cases, to try Rumsfeld for war crimes. Those legal experts who filed the case believe that there is a fair chance of succeeding in bringing Rumsfeld and other Pentagon brasses to justice. The problem, however, is even if Rumsfeld and Co. are found guilty and condemned, I doubt, the USA will allow their extradition for hearing and subsequent imprisonment. The matter may eventually go to the UN, and I mean, UNSC, the authority with biting powers. But there as a veto-power, the USA will not allow its own criminals to be prosecuted. Nonetheless, for freedom loving people like us, such acts would further isolate the USA from the rest of the world and limit visits of war criminals to foreign countries.

Soon after the Democrats won the Nov., '06 election in the U.S. Senate and the Congress, there have already been calls for impeaching Bush. I doubt that speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi will impeach Bush fearing that the move may instead backfire (something that had happened with Clinton), making Bush and his party more popular than they ought to be in the next 2008 election (when Bush will not run, but his party man could win). The prudent method as discussed today is to let the next two years go without bringing impeachment charges against Bush, but after his tenure is over, he be tried for a whole series of charges.

The bottom line is: despots are not free and cannot feel secure as long as they are alive and outside the power grid. Their trial and prosecution is necessary to arrest the epitome of despotism that has stained human rights records in our world. They need to pay for their crimes eventually.

As I have hinted in my earlier article in the Burma Digest on what can be done about the SPDC junta, something that was also agreed upon by Tun Mahathir Muhammad of Malaysia, our options against the war criminals are very few as long as they are holding the power. The verdict in Baghdad against Saddam Hossein also does not encourage them to relinquish that leash of power soon. A compromise is necessary where they will be promised to be unharmed provided they relinquish their grip of power peacefully to the elected reps of Burma. Without that mechanism in place, I am afraid that the junta will stick to its grip, bringing more calamities to the people. Burma is not the Middle East for which American and Brit soldiers are willing to die for hegemony. So, the rules that apply for the Middle Eastern countries, unfortunately, do not apply to Burma in the dictionary of those who have the power to bring about that necessary change. They are hypocrites and war criminals themselves. What do we expect from them other than lies, deceptions and hypocrisy?

In spite of such grim realities, however, our struggle for freedom and human rights must go on unperturbed, for we are aspiring for a higher moral ground and we make no bones about our righteous cause.

 


Leave A Comment
&
Share Your Insights

 

Get CC HeadlinesOn your Desk Top

 

 

 

 

Search Our Archive



Our Site

Web