By Steve Hynd
Amnesty International rightly says that Taliban members who perpetrate atrocities should be charged with war crimes. But it's method for that accountability would have wider implications (emphasis mine):
"The Taliban and other insurgents are becoming far bolder in their systematic killing of civilians," said Sam Zarifi, Amnesty International's Asia-Pacific Director. "Targeting of civilians is a war crime, plain and simple. The Afghan people are crying out for justice and have a right to accountability and compensation."
"There is no practical justice system in Afghanistan now that can address the lack of accountability," said Zarifi. "So the Afghan government should ask the International Criminal Court to investigate war crimes and crimes against humanity that may have been committed by all parties to the conflict."
Afghanistan is a signatory to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
...Amnesty International welcomes the reported drop in deaths caused by NATO-led forces, but sounded a note of caution.
"Pro-government forces were responsible for at least 223 deaths in six months, and NATO still has no coherent way of accounting for casualties," said Zarifi. "Special Forces in Afghanistan are still failing to be open about their actions when being called to account over civilian casualties."
It's a nice idea - and would open the way for prosecution of high officials and leaders for their complicity in such crimes. As Josh Mull tweets: "Why go for SOF and Taliban grunts? What about Obama, Gates, Omar, Kayani?" But with the US and Karzai backing an amnesty to protect not just reconciling Taliban but also Karzai-supporting warlords who are just as bad and with the Obama administration's record of protecting Bush-era officials who ordered or supported war crimes, it's so not going to happen.
The truth is that the Afghan occupation is likely to play out without anyone of note being held resonsible for the crimes they set moving. Pity.
No comments:
Post a Comment