Let's put things in perspective for a quick second

This article at Foreign Policy magazine’s blog got me thinking.  It is an update on the arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court for Omar al-Bashir, the president of Sudan.  It compares him to Mugabe and mocks Bashir’s reaction to the warrant, which was to describe it as neocolonialism and an infringement of his sovereignty.  The scary thing is, I understand his point.

Let me be clear.  The situation in Darfur is tragic, despicable, and should be rectified as quickly as possible.  As head of the government of Sudan, Omar al-Bashir is directly responsible.  My defense of his defense says nothing about the actions for which he is accused. 

But it’s important to try to consider the issue from his perspective.  First, you have a powerful institution far away, run by white men, telling him to step down and surrender himself over an issue that you perceive to be an internal affair.  Sudan was not an independent country until 1956, which is really quite recent; the memory of colonialism is a vivid, fresh one and should not be underestimated.  So to have a white man from far away tell you how to run your country can understandably feel like something the govnerment of Sudan thought it got rid of 53 years ago.

Second, this is in fact an issue of sovereignty.  Generally speaking, I support the expansion of international sovereign institutions in Europe.  But the ICC is making a ruling that is consistent with an attempt to establish its domain of justice over every state which is a member of the UN, which is basically the entire world.  Their actions stand in contrast to the dominant rhetoric of national self-determination around which every country still organizes itself.  One can debate the validity of this organization on philosophical grounds, but to do so does not mean that rulers of governments still see themselves as independent of outside influence without their acquiescence.  To acknowledge the validity of an international warrant is to admit the weakness of the state.

Finally, there is a whiff of celebrity arbitrariness surrounding the case.  Again, I want to repeat that the situation in Darfur is ghastly and should not exist one more second, but we must realize that this is not the only humanitarian tragedy in the world.  I have not heard about arrest warrants for leaders of the Democratic Republic of Congo.  Or what about the leaders of Myanmar, who killed their own citizens by denying outside assistance after Hurricane Nigri?  And Kim Jong-Il has surely killed more of his citizens through starvation and gulags than al-Bashir.  Where is his arrest warrant?  (Oh, he might have a nuclear weapon and his artillery could destroy Seoul.  Maybe provoking him is not a wise move.)  These are just the examples from the top of my head, and I’m sure one could find several other cases which prompt the question: Why is the international system targeting Omar al-Bashir and not others?  He is not the only disgusting leader in the world, so I can understand why he would feel justified in claiming that he is being singled out and targeted.

Sudan is a poor, weak country.  My only point is that I can understand al-Bashir’s retorts to the arrest warrant, even if he is wrong where it matters the most.