Originally published on the CGS blog on March 26, 2010.
Part III: This is the third post from Ariela Blatter, Director of Policy and Programs for Citizens for Global Solutions. Ariela is attending the 8th Resumed Session of the Assembly of States Parties in New York City this week.
Did the US delegation get unfairly singled out today, as the only country that feels that haste makes waste when it comes to the dash to finalize the crime of aggression? Not according to the UK, who stood up in the ICC Assembly to agree with the US concerns on the inclusion of the crime. The US remained silent in the session as the UK took on the Venezuelan delegation’s constant attempts to prove that the US stands alone. Today’s colorful closing session on the crime of aggression at the UN became an interminable he-said-she-said debate over the language used in the Chair’s summary report of the Assembly of States Parties. All of the fuss arose when the states parties were asked to approve the aggression working group report, drafted by Prince Zeid, which stated that “some [countries] cautioned the assembly that in so far as the Rome Statute, the crime of aggression should not be concluded hastily, and should be built on consensus.” So in the end, at least in diplomatic “speak,” the US may not be in good company with “some” countries in its position on aggression, but it can now return to DC knowing that that the final text reflects that it stands with “a few” countries. Phew- that was a close one!
TAKE ACTION to support the ICC
