Comments on: Ending NATO’s double standard

By: William_Wallace

William_Wallace — Mon, 21 May 2012 10:52:07 +0000

Very pleasantly surprised to see a piece like this. If only it were more common in US discourse!

The international legal framework which both US political parties worked so hard to build after WWII and for decades after, is now being delegitimized by the US herself. The erstwhile party of Lincoln now seems completely adrift in magical thinking, gazing into a rose-colored mirror.

By: JamieJR

JamieJR — Mon, 21 May 2012 02:47:57 +0000

Rules of war? What are the rules of war, Mr. Rohde? Did you formulate them?

By: majkmushrm

majkmushrm — Sun, 20 May 2012 21:25:41 +0000

“Caesar’s wife must be above reproach” … and so, too, must we be above reproach if we wish to preach to the rest of the world, issue human rights reports on countries, and try and imprison war criminals. It is in our interests to use our current position to enforce the rule of law including to ourselves. When, at some time in the future, we are no longer omnipotent, we, too, will want the rule of law.

By: Ian_Kemmish

Ian_Kemmish — Sun, 20 May 2012 21:21:35 +0000

As the author points out, 27 out of 28 NATO members did ratify the treaty establishing the ICC, and are bound by its provisions. If tie accountability and credibility of NATO are diluted, then it seems rather unlikely to be because one of its members enjoys exceptional status in this respect.

This point on its own is surely well worth debating, and the author does it no service by pretending for the sake of a good column that it has something to do with the USA’s status. For further evidence that the issues are unrelated, one need only think back to all those Internet videos of “NATO troops raping Serbian children” from the 1990′s – years before the ICC was established.

One could, perhaps, go even further. Perhaps the only thing which stops the ICC being perceived in places like Serbia as merely victor’s justice, as merely NATO justice, is the fact that the USA apparently fears it? It is at least something to consider.

By: Greenspan2

Greenspan2 — Sat, 19 May 2012 13:21:17 +0000

There’s no shortage of hypocrisy anywhere in the world, including those which are critical of NATO. Geopolitical advantage is always the primary factor for turning a blind eye to atrocities, and it is not only the West which has deliberately engaged in such policies. Which eastern or Asian countries have stepped up and made sacrifices to protect civilians from atrocities or to protect the rule of law in other countries? Most do not even do these things in their own countries.

By: P.H.Bakka

P.H.Bakka — Sat, 19 May 2012 11:00:52 +0000

There may indeed be a double standard. We can avod the entire problem by not acting at all. Which probably is the best way of dealing with problems in far away countries we don’t know anything about.

By: paintcan

paintcan — Fri, 18 May 2012 15:49:06 +0000

Excuse me – Unquestioningly.

By: paintcan

paintcan — Fri, 18 May 2012 15:47:31 +0000

As much as the more developed countries preach the rule of law they seem to want to live like ancient Kings who were the law but were not subject to it.

And so many seem to be willing to accept that questioningly.

By: TheUSofA

TheUSofA — Fri, 18 May 2012 14:46:24 +0000

Hypocrisy has been a staple of Western Democracies for quite some time.

By: jwab

jwab — Fri, 18 May 2012 13:34:23 +0000

Perhaps, but might is right