Today during MoveOn's online “SyriaTown Hall”, Phyllis Bennis made an important point about seeking
indictments for war crimes in ongoing conflicts. Once a party is
indicted, his incentive to negotiate an end to the conflict
decreases.
I personally favor handling the
allegations of chemical weapons use in Syria as war crimes. The UNSecurity Council should refer the matter to the InternationalCriminal Court (ICC).
But if the Obama administration is
correct—the U.S. government has lied about these things in the
past—and the Assad government did order chemical weapons attacks,
sending the matter to the ICC could be an impediment to negotiating a
settlement.
I propose the concept of freezing
charges at the ICC. In cases where the allegations are referred to
the ICC, the allegations could have a rider attached to the referral.
The rider would say, if the conflict
in Syria reaches a negotiated settlement approved by the UN Security
Council the ICC's mandate to investigate and prosecute these war
crimes allegations would be frozen. As long as the agreement holds,
the prosecutions would not proceed.
This is an imperfect justice. But it
also provides the UN Security Council more of a stick to prod parties
to the negotiating table.
