SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Russia has repudiated the International Criminal Court (ICC) by withdrawing its signature from the founding Rome Statute, a day after the ICC published a report that called Russian's annexation of Crimea an "on-going state of occupation". Russia is not a member of the ICC because it had never ratified the treaty:
Russia has said it is formally withdrawing its signature from the founding statute of the international criminal court, a day after the court published a report classifying the Russian annexation of Crimea as an occupation. The repudiation of the tribunal, though symbolic, is a fresh blow to efforts to establish a global legal order for pursuing genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.
In recent months, three African countries who were all full members of the ICC – South Africa, Burundi and Gambia – have signalled their intention to pull out, following complaints that ICC prosecutions focused excessively on the African continent.
The Russian foreign ministry made the announcement on Wednesday on the orders of the president, Vladimir Putin, saying the tribunal had failed to live up to hopes of the international community and denouncing its work as "one-sided and inefficient". Russia signed the Rome statute in 2000 and cooperated with the court, but had not ratified the treaty and thus remained outside the ICC's jurisdiction. This means that the latest move, though highly symbolic, will not change much in practice.
Also at the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, NPR, NYT, RT, and Foreign Policy.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Dunbal on Thursday November 17 2016, @03:02PM
Oh wait. Other notable "non members" include China and the United States of America. Why would Russia want to put its head in that particular noose?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Arik on Thursday November 17 2016, @03:11PM
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by Dunbal on Thursday November 17 2016, @03:16PM
Makes perfect sense, considering that "double standards" sort of defines the recent geopolitical climate.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 17 2016, @05:39PM
"double standards" and "hypocrisy" are part of geopolitics, I don't think it is a recent addition.
Even if you look at history, one side is lambasted for doing the exact same thing another side was praised for. One secession movement is "self determination trumps sovereignty, so will of the people wins" (Kosovo done by NATO) while another is "illegal violation of sacred sovereignty" (Crimea done by Russia). Same outcome, two widely different reactions (The Russosphere condemned Kosovo, while the western sphere condemns Crimea).
A bit like "one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter", it is all about your worldview and your reality is defined by which side you fall on.
Basically, don't touch politics with a barge pole. It is the realm of proper psychopaths and loons, where "defining your own reality" is not only not frowned upon and seen as crazy, but actively encouraged, along with forcing your reality on others.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 17 2016, @06:06PM
one side is lambasted for doing the exact same thing another side was praised for. One secession movement is "self determination trumps sovereignty, so will of the people wins" (Kosovo done by NATO) while another is "illegal violation of sacred sovereignty" (Crimea done by Russia)
NATO is not a country. It occupied and annexed no one.
You have a really warped definition of "exact same thing"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Geotti on Friday November 18 2016, @01:03AM
NATO is not a country. It occupied and annexed no one.
Who said it is? And if it's a fucking "defense alliance," why the fuck does it throw bombs on a sovereign state? Oh, right, NATO & EU expansion. No, no one annexed or occupied anyone. Fuck off!
(Score: 2) by KiloByte on Saturday November 19 2016, @04:22AM
Except Crimea was done without even any significant involvement of local traitors -- this was well-known beforehand but if you want another proof, there's that recent leak of Vladislav Surkov's emails.
And Russia has yet to conduct their first vote that's not a complete sham. And by "Russia", I mean their entire history, including tsardom, Soviet Union and modern fake-democratic regime. To the contrary, they flaunt results like 99.5% votes for One Russia with 99.4% turnout in Chechnya, a republic that had two wars against the federal government (ie, One Russia) since the fall of the Soviet Union, and a history of extreme oppression dating well into tsar times. Just think: had Lincoln not been assassinated, how many votes would he get in Alabama in 1868?
You might think that vote rigging is merely the child's play that resulted in a contest between two worst possible candidates in the US, or gave a party 56 as many seats for 1/3 the votes in the UK? No, the western world tries at least a veneer of propriety, which is totally unknown in Russia and places they conquered.
Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday November 17 2016, @06:15PM
Exactly.
According to TFA:
The action was largely symbolic, because Russia — like the United States — has not ratified the treaty and is not under the court’s jurisdiction
So no change here, and no news either. And Elvis is still dead.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.