Robert Naiman, Policy Director of Just Foreign Policy, asks U.S. Tryst with International Law: Could We Deepen the Romance? This becomes a powerful essay after a rather awkward, and odd start, in which he notes that:
Even prominent Democratic activist Markos Moulitsas mocked Secretary of State Kerry for lecturing Russia on international law after voting for the illegal Iraq war. The hypocrisy charge has gotten good play.
What? "even Markos Moulitsas?" Is he saying "yes, we all know how that Markos Moulitsas always looks the other way when hypocrisy stands clearly before us? I didn't expect our Meta discussions to go national, and start a Spanish Inquisition!
I was just about to write in and tell Robert Naiman to mind his own business, but then after second thought, it seems more likely he's suggesting that "even ardent Democratic activist Markos Moulitsas mocked John Kerry for hypocrisy - that's how bad the "hypocrisy" was. "Even that notorious partisan Markos Moulitsas had to admit it," is what he might be saying.
If this is his meaning, then Naiman has a powerful point. (About US hypocrisy, not about Markos.)
If Russia is allowed to violate international law the way that the U.S. and Israel routinely do, it will not make the world more just. Russia may have legitimate grievances and legitimate interests in Ukraine, but as Secretary of State Kerry rightly argued -- even if he was a hypocrite while doing so -- that doesn't justify violating international law. We don't want to live in the world in which Russia is allowed to join the U.S.-Israel club of international law violators. We want to live in the world in which the U.S. and Israel are held to the same standards of compliance with international law to which the U.S. and Europe are now ostensibly trying to hold Russia.
So far, Europe has proven unable or unwilling to hold the U.S. and Israel to these standards. No European sanctions were imposed on U.S. officials when the U.S. illegally invaded Iraq. No European sanctions have been imposed on Israeli officials for Israel's illegal occupation of the West Bank.
In its drone strike policy, the U.S. violates international law. In its Iran sanctions policy, the U.S. violates international law. In its indefinite detention policy, the U.S. violates international law. In its failure to account for the U.S. use of torture during the Bush Administration, the U.S. violates international law. In its arming of Syrian rebels, the U.S. violates international law. There have been no European sanctions against U.S. officials involved in these ongoing violations.
For some reason Robert Naiman doesn't even mention the more glaring hypocrisy of Israel's arsenal of nuclear weapons, believed to be between 75 and 400 warheads, including the ability to deliver them any where on the planet, and its refusal to sign the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, while accusing Iran of violating it.
But, for the remainder of his powerful essay, Naiman focuses more on what we Americans can do to being our own actions more in compliance with international law, as we should, by proposing that the Senate Intelligence Committee declassify the CIA's use of torture, which I agree with.
Also we could stop boycotting the "U.N. Human Rights Council on a resolution calling for greater transparency in the U.S. drone strike policy."
Naiman also proposed the House passes Representative Jim Moran's "request to President Obama, urging him to protect Iranian civilians' access to medicine from U.S. sanctions."
Now coming back to this matter of Markos ...
10:47 AM PT: I was just over a Markos' Nutapoolza and see he's been having a tough week from nutty critics so I left him this encouragement.
Keep on truckin' Markos: Yes, International Rule of Law is a Good Thing!