#4 On one hand, regional responsibility seems a fine thing, and each group of nations dealing with its own problems.
On the other hand, I have reasons to mistrust it: Throughout the third-world (and CIS too) there seem to be growing (or atleast not receding) movements of so-called "anti-colonialism" or "anti-imperialism" which in reality are merely a pretense for the case of regional or racial or religious unity in opposition to democratic pressures by Europe or the United States: in short they label the cause of democracy, freedom, human rights nothing bu "colonial intervention" -- but they look the other way in the face of the most brutal neighbourly oppression, imperialism or massacre.
"Indiofascists" in Latin America hating white folk -- black racists in Zimbabwe and South Africa trying to erase any elements of colonial past, blaming all that goes wrong to that past -- CIS nations condemning the Orange Revolution as "Western interventionism" -- Arabs calling the very existence of Israel as "colonial state".
So in short: "new African Panel" -- is the rejection of ICC a way to reject Western pressures and "Western values" in the cause of blind African "solidarity"? If so, that's a very bad thing. |
Nigeria on Wednesday proposed a new African panel to hear cases of atrocities in Sudan's Darfur region in apparent opposition to European calls for trying cases before the International Criminal Court (ICC). The surprise memorandum from Nigeria, which holds the African Union presidency, came days before the UN Security Council plans a vote on a resolution on Sudan that seeks to impose targeted sanctions on individuals involved in the Darfur conflict and specify where to try perpetrators of atrocities. The Nigerian note, addressed to the European Union, proposed an "African panel for criminal justice and reconciliation" to prosecute those suspected of war crimes in Darfur and also to provide for reconciliation. It said the proposal enjoyed "the support of the government of Sudan."