US attacked over UN resolution (BBC)

[tinnypriv]

US attacked over UN resolution
BBC News, August 25 2003

International human rights groups have accused the US Government of attempting to block a United Nations resolution that would seek to enhance the protection of humanitarian workers in conflict zones.

US officials are objecting to a section of the resolution which refers to attacks on humanitarian workers as a war crime under the statutes of the newly-established International Criminal Court (ICC).

Washington does not recognise the court.

...

Human Rights Watch has accused the US of waging an ill-conceived and ideologically-driven crusade against the court and in the process, compromising efforts to protect aid workers.

"After the tragic killing of aid workers in Baghdad, the US opposition to the proposed resolution is disgraceful," said Richard Dicker, director of Human Rights Watch's international justice programme.

...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3180667.stm

[Must_B_Free]

1. UN? How Irrelevant!

hAHA!
</whatever>

[bahrbearian]

2. The U.N. isn't that some debating society

[QuietStorm]

3. Sound like the US want's it oil but does not want to be held libel

for the security of anyone there. they come of at their own risk. This falls short of a declaration to be handed out to all foreigners in the area for signature. A declaration which would relief the US of any responsibility of some violence should befall them, accidental or unpurpose. doesn't that sound familar.

[AnnabelLee]

4. This is low, really low

"US officials are objecting to a section of the resolution which refers to attacks on humanitarian workers as a war crime under the statutes of the newly-established International Criminal Court (ICC)."

Are they planning on having our troops attack humanitarian workers now? With all of the "accidental" shootings of civilians that have happened, this doesn't surprise me.