Signs of haste
By
Salama A Salama
Egypt, under pressure from Washington, has signed a bilateral agreement exempting US citizens from the International Criminal Court (ICC). In doing so it has joined several other countries in assisting the US to avoid international justice and any legal procedures pertaining to any crime committed by US soldiers or personnel in breach of international law and the Geneva conventions.
The agreement was signed without publicity and in an atmosphere of haste. Although Washington played a major role in the creation of the ICC in its earliest days it has, more recently, been desperately searching for a loophole, eventually refusing to endorse the creation of the ICC for fear its soldiers or civil servants might be prosecuted there. It has managed the manoeuvre by signing bilateral agreements with countries, including Poland, Hungary and Romania. All this despite the fact that the UN Security Council had already issued a temporary one-year resolution exempting US soldiers participating in peace- keeping operations from appearing in front of the court.
The signing of the agreement with Egypt is odd, given Cairo was keen to support the ICC's founding in 1998. It appointed the international legal expert Sherif El- Bassiouni as its representative at the founding meetings in Rome. Some 90 countries, excluding Egypt but including most European states, endorsed the agreement though US President George W Bush's administration refused to do so.
Egypt's wavering became obvious when the government dallied in presenting the agreement to the People's Assembly for ratification. Yet it remains inexplicable why Cairo remained silent until the US State Department -- and not the Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs -- revealed that Egypt had joined 42 other countries in signing bilateral agreements giving immunity to Americans from legal prosecution by the ICC. Jordan is now the only Arab or Muslim country which has endorsed the ICC agreement.
Washington's pretext for refusing to support the ICC is that the agreement lacks the guarantees necessary to ensure it will not be used for political purposes. Expansive military adventures have become an essential feature of America's foreign policy and the US threatened to halt military and economic aid, alongside other pressures, in convincing weaker countries to sign the agreements protecting American troops.
In defending the Egyptian position some commentators have argued that the ICC deals with war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity: American soldiers, they say, are unlikely to commit such crimes in Egypt on a scale worthy of prosecution.
The issue, though, is not about what American soldiers may or may not do on Egyptian soil: rather, it is a question of establishing an international judicial order, which in light of the crimes perpetrated by Israel against humanity should be a great regional priority.
The current US administration clearly does not want to see the emergence of a consistent international justice system. It does not care to halt its double standards to ensure international stability and security. According to the US justice is selective; it is about acquiring -- through force -- special benefits to protect its own citizens from investigation and place them a notch above the rest of mankind. This is the same method Israel applies and it is surely no coincidence that the US pressured Belgium to change its laws to prevent Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and others from being prosecuted.
It is regrettable that the Egyptian government should lend its support to such a position at a time when recent developments indicate that it is likely to have severe consequences for the Middle East and on the wider international stage.
Where is Egypt's national interest in this? No one knows and no one is telling.
