After
ICC Papers In,
Palestine
Tells ICP
Retroactive to
Gaza, Nigeria
Excused?
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
January 2, more
here
--
Days after the
UN Security
Council
rejected
Palestine's
draft
resolution,
Mahmoud Abbas
on December 31
signed the
Rome State to
join the
International
Criminal
Court. Inner
City Press had
asked
Palestine's
Permanent
Observer Riyad
Mansour about
just this move
back on
December 11,
here.
On January 2
just after the
UN accepted
Palestine's
papers to join
the ICC, Inner
City Press
asked Mansour
if the
decision has
been made to
ask for action
on Israel at
the ICC, and
about the
CRomnibus
appropriations
bill provision
to cut US
funding to the
Palestinian
Authority if
it does so. Video here and embedded below.
Mansour said
Palestine has
already asked
the ICC
Registrar for
retroactivity
to cover the
last Gaza war
in 2014, and
that he would
met with a
representative
of the ICC
Registrar, who
happened to be
in New York,
in an hour's
time.
On the
threatened
funding cut,
which Senator
Chuck Schumer
issued a press
release about,
Mansour said
it was strange
to punish the
Palestinians
for seeking
justice.
Inner City
Press also
asked Mansour
if Nigeria's
absention on
the Palestine
resolution
surprised him.
He said to
focus on the
larger power,
and that
Nigeria's
Explanation of
Vote sounded
like they had
voted Yes.
So
what
happened?
On the
afternoon of
December 31,
the US State
Department's
Jeff Rathke,
Director of
Office of
Press
Relations, put
out this
statement:
"We are deeply
troubled by
today’s
Palestinian
action
regarding the
ICC. It is an
escalatory
step that will
not achieve
any of the
outcomes most
Palestinians
have long
hoped to see
for their
people.
Actions like
this are not
the answer.
Hard as it is,
all sides need
to find a way
to work
constructively
and
cooperatively
together to
lower
tensions,
reject
violence, and
find a path
forward.
"Today’s
action is
entirely
counter-productive
and does
nothing to
further the
aspirations of
the
Palestinian
people for a
sovereign and
independent
state. It
badly damages
the atmosphere
with the very
people with
whom they
ultimately
need to make
peace.
"As we’ve said
before, the
United States
continues to
strongly
oppose actions
– by both
parties – that
undermine
trust and
create doubts
about their
commitment to
a negotiated
peace. Our
position has
not
changed.
Such actions
only push the
parties
further
apart.
"Every month
that goes by
without
constructive
engagement
between the
parties only
increases
polarization
and allows
more space for
destabilizing
actions.
Our efforts
should focus
on creating an
environment
for meaningful
talks.
"While we are
under no
illusions
regarding the
difficult road
of
negotiations,
direct
negotiations
are ultimately
the only
realistic path
for achieving
the
aspirations of
both peoples.
All of us
would like to
see the day
when that
effort can
resume, and
can lead to
the peace that
we all know is
the only real,
sustainable
answer to the
underlying
causes of this
conflict."
The document
is supposed to
be filed or
deposited with
UN Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon, who
is listed as
on "annual
leave." (Ban's
spokespeople
have no press
briefing
scheduled for
today.)
The ICC, of
course, is no
panacea.
Sudan's Omar
al Bashir, for
example, was
been indicted
by the ICC for
genocide, but
still UN
officials like
Herve Ladsous
meet with him
without
providing
explanations.
Still, Abbas
said he would
do something,
and now he
has.
The
Palestinian
resolution
which failed
on December 30
needed nine
"Yes" votes to
trigger the
expected US
veto. It got
only eight
"Yes" votes,
as Nigeria
abstained
along with the
United
Kingdom,
Lithuania,
South Korea
and Rwanda.
Afterward,
Palestine's
Mansour said,
"Why have the
efforts of the
Arab Group,
with the full
support of the
NAM and the
OIC and all
other friends
worldwide, to
legislate this
consensus
through the
Council as a
contribution
towards
bringing an
end to this
conflict
through
peaceful,
political,
diplomatic and
non-violent
means
repeatedly
blocked?"
The
NAM is the
Non-Aligned
Movement and
as Inner City
Press noted
contemporaneous
with the vote,
both Rwanda
and Nigeria
are members of
NAM (list
here) --
but both of
them
abstained.
Rwanda's
abstention was
assumed,
including in
the Arab Group
meeting held
earlier on
December 30.
The abstention
of Nigeria,
which meant
that the
United States'
"No" vote
would not be
considered a
veto, was
something
else.
To the
surprise of
some, Nigeria
and its
President
Goodluck
Jonathan were
not listed
among the
calls of US
Secretary of
State John
Kerry. The
State
Department's
spokesperson
Jeff Rathke on
December 30 said
"In
the last 24 to
48 hours the
Secretary has
made a number
of calls to
counterparts.
Let me give
you a list of
them. He
has spoken
with President
Kagame of
Rwanda; he has
spoken on a
few occasions
with Jordanian
Foreign
Minister
Judeh; he has
spoken with
the Saudi
foreign
minister, the
Egyptian
foreign
minister, with
Russian
Foreign
Minister
Lavrov, with
the UK foreign
secretary,
with the EU
high
representative,
Chilean
Foreign
Minister
Munoz,
Lithuanian
Foreign
Minister
Linkevicius.
The – he has
spoken, as I
mentioned
yesterday,
with PA
President
Abbas.
He has spoken
with the
Luxembourg
foreign
minister, with
German Foreign
Minister
Steinmeier,
and with
French Foreign
Minister
Fabius. So by
my count,
that’s 13
different
individuals.
Some of them
he’s spoken
with more than
once, so more
than 13 calls
over the last
day or two."
Despite this,
it's said
that Kerry
called
Goodluck
Jonathan, and
that a State
Department
spokesperson -
Rathke? - said
it. Where?
We continue to
wait.
It's
reported that
while Kerry
doesn't list a
call to
Nigeria,
Israeli Prime
Minister
Netanyau did
-- for
Goodluck, some
say.
Inner
City Press
after the vote
asked Jordan's
Ambassador
Dina Kawar if
the Arab Group
intended to
put this or
another
Palestine
resolution in
front of the
new line up of
Security
Council
members
entering in
two days, with
Angola
replacing
Rwanda and
Malaysia
replacing
South Korea
(and New
Zealand
replacing
Australia,
which voted
no). She said
the Arab Group
would keep
working, but
did not say
when another
resolution
will be put
forward.
So what comes
next? Below,
we cover the
issue of the
International
Criminal
Court.
A source from
inside the
Arab Group
meeting tells
Inner City
Press that
question - the
benefit or not
of "making"
the US veto -
was a major
topic in the
meeting, but
the decision
was made by
the Arab Group
to support the
Palestinians'
strategy and
request for a
vote, with the
above
expectation,
at this time.