O International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant against Vladimir Putin for the alleged illegal deportation of Ukrainian children and their transfer to Russian territories. This is “the news” that, not by chance, occupies the headlines of the great mass media in the West, but not in the rest of the world. There are 123 countries signatories to the Rome Statute, which gave rise to the ICC. Of these, 33 are from African states, 19 from Asia and the Pacific, 18 from Eastern Europe, 28 from Latin America and the Caribbean and 25 from Western Europe. According to the Statute, all of them are required to comply with arrest warrants issued by the ICC, whose headquarters are in The Hague. Will they? It’s not impossible, but certainly highly unlikely.
For now, neither the United States, nor China, nor Russia recognize the jurisdiction of the ICC, and the same goes for some other countries. In fact, as Noam Chomsky has observed on more than one occasion, the United States has not ratified a large part of the international treaties signed by the vast majority of members of the international community. the subpoena issued to Putin is just a piece of paper and nothing more. Therefore, the alleged universality of the ICC is more illusory than real. Secondly, it is necessary to recognize that this institution is more than anything else a European invention, a belated – and culpable – attempt at reparation for the crimes committed against oppressed peoples and nations during five centuries of colonial domination.
Third, Putin’s arrest and trial would be an anomalous event in the history of an international court that has never faltered before crimes against humanity perpetrated by the United States and its European allies during the Iraq War. This was done completely illegally, without authorization from the United Nations Security Council and based on a false pretext: the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The UN inspectors, as well as numerous experts who were on the spot, warned that this accusation, presented by the US government -and followed by all the “serious press” in the West- was a farce to justify a war of looting against a power oil company that demanded, as a previous step, to produce a “regime change” and end the government Saddam Hussein. This criminal adventure claimed the lives of more than a million people.ii Despite this, the masterminds and executors of this carnage were not molested by the togados of The Hague.
None George W. BushCondoleezza Rice and Colin Powell, for the United States, nor Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, on behalf of the United Kingdom, was not even noticed for the massacre unleashed in Iraqi lands. But Putin, demonized to the unspeakable by a Russophobic hysteria in the service of the great American project of destroying Russia, fragmenting it into multiple weak, if not impotent states, as he did with Yugoslavia at the end of the 20th century, Putin yes, we said, he should be called to testify before the Court and, in all likelihood, convicted. As we know, in addition to its racism and addiction to theft, hypocrisy and the duplicity of measuring and judging the same facts is another of the characteristics that characterize Western “civilization”, its political leadership and its media.
Before this arrest warrant was issued against Putin, the ICC had heard 31 war crimes cases, without exception, involving African nationals. How to explain this? Are the war crimes keeping the ICC awake only in Africa? Obviously not. But unlike the leaders of Western powers, Africans, like Russia today, lack the media, diplomatic, economic and political protection they enjoy. The leaders of the United States and European countries, especially the latter, have been committing atrocities with complete impunity for centuries. The victims of their crimes, or their Afro-descendants, are promptly summoned by international justice. Needless to say, there is not the slightest possibility that Putin will be arrested and brought before the ICC tribunal. But the episode reveals an important lesson by revealing the duplicity and the scandalous Westernist and pro-imperialist bias with which matters are handled in the supposedly impartial and objective bodies created by the dominant powers to lay the foundations of international “justice”. ”