Above International Law

The imperium is ruled not by fools but by liars, manipulators, murderers, and other criminals—all of whom tend to believe in their own virtue. The imperial state often functions accountable to no one. Wars of aggression are a crime against international law and a crime against humanity. And such crimes were committed when US leaders launched invasions against Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Somalia, Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan, and various other countries; and when they sponsored wars of attrition against civilian targets in Mozambique, Angola, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Yugoslavia, and scores of other places, leaving hundreds of thousands dead. The US empire asserts the right to invade and devastate any country for preemptive reasons, under the National Security Strategy (September 2002).⁴ No communist state or “rogue nation” or jihadist terror organization has a comparable record of such massive murderous global aggression.

As rulers of the planet, US leaders are inclined to pursue imperial diplomacy rather than traditional diplomacy. Traditional diplomacy is that process of settling disputes by looking for workable compromises, finding solutions that might leave both sides less than completely satisfied, but satisfied enough to avoid armed conflict.

Imperial diplomacy is something else, something of an oxymoron. It usually begins with the issuance of a set of demands that are implicitly treated as nonnegotiable—even if presented as “proposals.” The other side’s resistance or even hesitancy to accede to US demands are denounced by Washington as an unwillingness to negotiate in good faith (“they are being uncooperative”). US leaders announce they are running out of patience—as if they had manifested any patience to begin with. If concessions are made by the weaker nation, the empire then escalates its demands. Despite the other side’s attempts at accommodation and concession, in short time it is labeled as recalcitrant and belligerent and is subjected to US attack. Such was the pattern in regard to Iraq, Panama, Somalia, Nicaragua (under the Sandinistas), the Bosnian Serbs, Yugoslavia, and Iran, to name a few recent instances.

Imperial diplomacy is inclined to ignore treaties and international law, accepting only the limitations imposed by self-interest and power. Even the New York Times, seldom critical of US overseas initiatives, reported that people in many countries had “a widespread vision of America as an imperial power that has defied world opinion through unjustified and unilateral use of military force.”⁵

Here is an incomplete list of unilateral and imperious diplomatic stances taken by the United States within a brief span of time (mostly in one year, 2001):

• December 1997: the Treaty to Ban Land Mines was signed by 122 nations. The United States refused to sign.
• July 1998: the International Criminal Court Treaty, to try political and military personnel charged with crimes against humanity, was approved by 120 countries. Washington opposed the treaty. In December 2001 the US Senate passed an amendment that would exempt American military personnel from complying with the jurisdiction of the new court.
• February 2001: the United States refused to join 123 nations pledged to ban the use and production of antipersonnel bombs and mines.
• March 2001: the Kyoto Protocol of 1997 (dealing with global warming), which the United States never signed, was declared “dead” by the White House.
• April 2001: the United States stood virtually alone in opposing UN resolutions acknowledging a human right to adequate food, a moratorium on the death penalty, and lower costs for HIV/ AIDS drugs.
• May 2001: the United States refused to participate in international talks on ways to crack down on offshore and other tax and money-laundering havens.
• July 2001: the United States was the only nation to oppose the UN Agreement to Curb the International Flow of Illicit Small Arms.
• October 2001: the UN General Assembly passed a resolution, for the tenth consecutive year, calling for an end to the US embargo against Cuba, by a vote of 167 to 3 (the United States, Israel, and the Marshall Islands voted in opposition).
• November 2001: the United States forced a vote in the UN Committee on Disarmament and Security to demonstrate its opposition to the Comprehensive [Nuclear] Test Ban Treaty.
• December 2001: the United States officially withdrew from the Anti-ballistic Missile Treaty, renouncing a major arms control accord.⁶