US President Bill Clinton on Sunday signed the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC), just hours before the 31 December signature deadline. The action is seen as a tactical maneuver to keep the United States involved in negotiations over the court's potential establishment, the Washington Post reports. Sunday was the last day nations could sign the treaty without first having ratified it.
     "We do so to reaffirm our strong support for international accountability," Clinton said in a statement. "We do so as well because we wish to remain engaged in making the ICC an instrument of impartial and effective justice."
     Clinton added, however, that his administration still has "concerns about significant flaws in the treaty," in particular that the Hague-based court could claim jurisdiction over citizens from countries that do not ratify the treaty, which may include the United States. These were the same concerns that had been expressed by US conservatives and the Pentagon in their objections to the US signing the treaty.
     Clinton said one reason for signing, however, is to allow the United States to influence the continued development of the international court, which is designed to try people accused of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.
     David Scheffer, the US ambassador at large for war crimes, said the president signed the treaty "in honor of the victims of these crimes and also in honor of the US services who uphold these laws of war."
     The Post reports that it is unclear what will happen now that the United States has signed the treaty, considering that the Clinton administration leaves office in less than three weeks. Ratification by the Senate is considered unlikely. Clinton said in his statement that because of his concerns, he would not submit the treaty for ratification and would not recommend that President-elect George W. Bush do so either.
     "Chances are, it will never be ratified," said international law expert and former Justice Department official Lee Casey.

Reaction To The Signing
     Human rights organizations lauded Clinton's decision. "The president has made history here," said Richard Dicker, the director of international justice programs at Human Rights Watch. "He has strengthened hope for international justice for millions and millions of people worldwide."
     US Senator Jesse Helms, an active opponent of the court and chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, denounced the action. "This decision will not stand," he said. "I will make reversing this decision and protecting America's fighting men and women from the jurisdiction of this international kangaroo court one of my highest priorities in the new Congress" (Thomas Ricks, Washington Post, 1 Jan).
     Marc Thiessen, a spokesperson for Helms, said recently that the entire concept of the court is flawed, even if exceptions are made for US soldiers. He also said that Israel would be the first target of frivolous prosecutions (Reuters/Times of India, 2 Jan).
     Benjamin Ferencz, who prosecuted Nazi war crimes at Nuremberg and supports the ICC, said fears expressed by the academic and military communities when the Rome Statute was created "were unfounded" and could be allayed "by making certain corrections" (Noah Adams, NPR All Things Considered, 1 Jan. Note: You may have to download free software to access this audio link).
     UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan issued a statement praising Clinton's action, saying he was "well aware of the difficulties" Clinton faced and congratulating "him on his courage and far-sightedness in overcoming them." Annan added that the court "represents no threat to states with an organized criminal justice system. On the contrary, it is designed only to protect those most vulnerable people whose own government, if they have one, is unable or unwilling to prosecute those who violate their own fundamental human rights" (Lawrence Knutson, Associated Press/Nando.net, 31 Dec)
     For the full text of Clinton's statement, click here.
     Meanwhile, several other nations also signed the treaty before the deadline passed, including Israel, bringing the number of signatures to 139 (Ricks, Washington Post). Iran also signed the treaty shortly before the deadline (BBC Online, 1 Jan). Beginning yesterday, other nations wanting to become party to the treaty must first ratify it. The treaty comes into force after 60 nations have ratified. So far, 27 have done so (Ricks, Washington Post).
     The idea for a permanent international war crimes tribunal arose during the years immediately following World War II and has been periodically supported by certain groups ever since. Treaty supporters maintain that such a court is "the missing link" in the global legal system and could help address many instances of war crimes and crimes against humanity that have gone unpunished in the last 50 years (Knutson, AP/Nando.net).

In The Months To Come
     How the new administration will proceed regarding the treaty remains unclear, the Boston Globe reports. "The question is whether the Bush administration assumes an attitude of benign neglect, or whether it will be engaged in it, or oppose it," said Bill Pace, convener of the Coalition for an International Criminal Court (Boston Globe/Sydney Morning Herald, 1 Jan).
     The Financial Times reports that Clinton's decision places Bush in a diplomatic dilemma, noting that Bush will face immediate pressure from congressional Republicans to overturn the action (Gerard Baker, 2 Jan). The incoming Bush administration has declined to comment on the decision (Bill Nichols, USA Today, 2 Jan).
     Donald Rumsfeld, Bush's nominee for defense secretary, has already made it clear he opposes the tribunal, and in a joint letter with 11 other prominent former policymakers last month warned that "American leadership in the world would be the first casualty" of the court (James Bone, London Times/Montreal Gazette, 2 Jan).