In the history of civilization, war could be said to top the list of mankind's cruelest and ugliest creations. In the past, the perpetrators of all the various atrocities men commit against one another in the course of fighting and warfare could only be condemned in writings. There was no way to impose real sanctions on them, and for this reason the world could only stand by helplessly and watch while ambition-ridden megalomaniacs repeatedly trampled on human rights.
After World War II, when the US took the lead in guiding post-war reconstruction of the world order, it perceived the fearsome and destructive nature of war. Thus, when plans were being laid for the UN, it was clearly stipulated in the UN Charter that any warlike actions not approved by the UN and undertaken for the sake of preserving peace are illegal. In the half century after World War II, however, the world still experienced many incidents of war, aggression and genocide because there existed no organization or judicial institution able to restrain the individuals responsible for these crimes or accept appeals from victims.
In July 1998, however, when the Rome Conference was convened, the situation changed completely. No longer was it impossible to go after those who commit war crimes or genocide. At the conference, the countries in attendance voted unanimously to pass a resolution (known as the "Rome Statute") establishing a permanent International Criminal Court (ICC) responsible for trying people accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, crimes of aggression and so on. By July last year, this statute designed to protect human rights had already been signed and approved by over 60 countries. The ICC was formally established and ready to begin operations.
The ICC is a permanent, independent judicial institution under the guidance of the UN. Its establishment could be called a milestone in mankind's march toward realizing the rights to peace, security and the rule of law. Its function is to indict and punish those guilty of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and crimes of aggression. Moreover, its jurisdiction is not limited to affairs between countries.
The ICC has the right to investigate, indict and try anyone guilty of one of the four crimes listed above. The difference between the ICC and the International Court of Justice under the auspices of the UN is that the ICC is only responsible for investigating individual criminal culpability and it exercises jurisdiction only if the courts of any given country are unable to try a case on their own.
Furthermore, apart from countries applying to the court to open an investigation, the court's prosecutors may also carry out an investigation on their own initiative based on their knowledge of criminal activity. In addition, the court's jurisdiction is not limited to nations that are signatories of the Rome Statute. Even if the nation where criminal activity takes place or the accused has citizenship is not a signatory, the court can still exercise its powers. And it is precisely because it has these special characteristics that the ICC can act as a deterrent to individuals who would arbitrarily violate the human rights of others.
As a member of the international community, Taiwan has been relentlessly oppressed by China in international forums of all sorts and has been kicked out of numerous international organizations. Nevertheless, Taiwan still scrupulously abides by its responsibilities and duties as a member of the international community and does its utmost to respect and comply with many international treaties.
Taiwan has not disregarded international treaties just because it is not a signatory nation. While Taiwan continues to apply for membership in many international organizations, we should also note that becoming a signatory of the ICC represents a goal we can strive to attain. Since China, which has always had a poor human-rights record, has not yet signed and is even afraid to become a signatory nation of the ICC, it has no basis for trying to suppress Taiwan's application.
In the face of China's missile threat and other military threats, Taiwan must seek self-protection. Joining the signatories of the ICC would be a form of "alternative" self-defense. If China were to invade Taiwan, it would be engaging in criminal behavior prohibited by the ICC, and China's leaders would be considered war criminals and face investigation and indictment.
For this reason, China's schemes to attack Taiwan militarily could be deterred. Becoming a signatory of the ICC could help international society better understand Taiwan's commitment to human rights and at the same time provide real safeguards to our national security. Taiwan should actively campaign to be a part of the ICC and stand together with mainstream views around the world by striving to defend human rights.
Chien Hsi-chieh is the executive director of the Peacetime Foundation of Taiwan.
Translated by Ethan Harkness
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
After “Operation Absolute Resolve” to capture former Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, the US joined Israel on Saturday last week in launching “Operation Epic Fury” to remove Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his theocratic regime leadership team. The two blitzes are widely believed to be a prelude to US President Donald Trump changing the geopolitical landscape in the Indo-Pacific region, targeting China’s rise. In the National Security Strategic report released in December last year, the Trump administration made it clear that the US would focus on “restoring American pre-eminence in the Western hemisphere,” and “competing with China economically and militarily
RSS