Sudan

Pete Hoskin has a piece in the Spectator blog criticising the Muslim Association of Britain’s statement on Sudan and Darfur, which said that it opposed the ICC arrest warrant for Omar al-Bashir, President of Sudan, on the grounds that similar prosecutions haven't been launched against war crimes in "Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya". Hoskin points out, rightly, that Bashir is about as nasty a piece of work as you are likely to find and that many of his victims were Muslims.

I’m afraid, however, that in one sense the MAB, normally a safe haven of unargued nonsense and racist cant, are right. Just as our war against Saddam Hussein lost legitimacy because there was nothing he had done that China hadn’t (invaded a neighbouring country, acquired WMD, ethnic cleansing, persecution of its own political dissidents) – and we weren’t going to invade China, were we? – so the lack of investigation other suspected ‘crimes’ by the ICC – and I don’t necessarily agree with the MAB’s list – makes this look as if it were a whim of the Western nations, self-righteous posing.

The UN scarcely lifted a finger to help Bashir’s victims. It is a little late now to enter judgment.

Sudan: an international shambles

So the International Criminal Court has issued a warrant for the arrest of Sudan's president, Omar al-Bashir, for war crimes (not for genocide, as had been requested by the prosecution). Mr al-Bashir was not present at the deliberations of this court, nor did he recognise its authority.

In retaliation Sudan has expelled aid agencies, putting at further risk the lives of hundreds of thousands of people.

One can't help thinking that a little less idealism and a little more realpolitik would have been useful here.

But I have grave doubts about this court. Supposing you were to be told, having done what you imagined to be the right thing, and as far as you were concerned perfectly legally, that it was in fact illegal, under laws made thousands of miles away in different language and under a different historical, political and philosophical background. Supposing the International Muslim Court sentenced you to death for adultery some years ago?

That it is of zero or negative use is amply demonstrated above. Is any African leader, about to attack his enemies as they have done for thousands of years, suddenly going to say 'Oooh! I might be indicted by the ICC and my name would be mud in Europe' ? I don't think so.

But also I don't think we, who emerged from barbarism just a few hundred years ago, have the moral right to condemn people who haven't yet.