I am not Russian, Chinese, nor Indian - I am a citizen of the 5-eyes criminal military junta, however.
The notion that a citizen of a war-crime committing nation can only have justice if they also demand that other war-crime committing nations face justice, is a dire fallacy.
You cannot, as an American citizen, do anything at all effective about Russia or China or India until you have prosecuted your own war criminals. You simply do not have the moral standing in the world, any more: the entire world sees the crimes of the American people, even if they don't.
Only then will the appropriate precedent be set for others to face justice too.
The whataboutism is why there is no justice.
First, we citizens jail our own war criminals. Only then will we have the tools go go after theirs. There is no other appropriate order of events.
All you do, otherwise, is justify your own states' war crimes without having the moral authority to go after any other states war crimes.
Given the enormous magnitude of the war crimes, crimes against humanity, and violations of human rights at massive scales that the 5-eyes nations have committed THIS CENTURY, there is no higher priority than for us to get on with it and start prosecuting our own war criminals first.
The moral authority you think exists, simply does not exist. Ours are the worst-offending states. Other states cannot even come close to matching the magnitude of OUR states' crimes.
> The notion that a citizen of a war-crime committing nation can only have justice if they also demand that other war-crime committing nations face justice, is a dire fallacy
I agree!
I’m not saying we need to commit war crimes. I’m not saying they should go unpunished. I’m saying we have to deal with this within our own laws. Unilaterally punting to the ICC doesn’t make sense if it has limited global authority and thus questionable legitimacy.
> Given the enormous magnitude of the war crimes, crimes against humanity, and violations of human rights at massive scales that the 5-eyes nations have committed THIS CENTURY, there is no higher priority
I think it’s a priority. Far from the priority. (If American goes right-wing imperial authoritarian, our past war crimes become something of a joke.)
> justify your own states' war crimes without having the moral authority to go after any other states war crimes
Nobody is justifying anything. But post-War international law was first based on a bipolar world, with one set of rules for America and the USSR, and another for everyone else, and then on a unipolar world, where America volunteered to subject itself to international rules and institutions. (We didn’t. But powerful elements within us tried.)
Now that world has fallen. We’re in a multipolar world. Not only is international law falling back into spheres of influence, with every global and regional hegemon regularly committing war crimes, it’s an open question whether anyone with power actually wants to enforce those rules.
(As for the ICC, has any ICC-member state has executed an arrest warrant against a third party’s leader? I return to my thesis that the ICC is a rent-a-Court for post-regime change reconciliation. Not a venue for trying cases and controversies.)
> Ours are the worst-offending states. Other states cannot even come close to matching the magnitude of OUR states' crimes
The facts are not with you on this one. To the point that you undermine your entire argument with the bias. I won’t argue America is better than Russia or China. But if you’re saying we’re in a different league from the USSR or China, you’re an unreliable narrator.
And you can’t vest the ICC with legitimacy while ignoring that it actually issued an arrest warrant for Putin.
The American government has already shown itself to be above international law.
The ICC issuing an arrest warrant for Putin demonstrates its legitimacy.
What it needs to do next is follow up with the long list of American war criminals, and the American people need to deliver them for prosecution in a court of law.
> I won’t argue America is better than Russia or China. But if you’re saying we’re in a different league from the USSR or China, you’re an unreliable narrator.
If you think the USSR still exists, it is you with the specious arguments. The USA is far worse at committing heinous war crimes, crimes against humanity and violations of human rights at massive scale, than any other nation. This Century!
I don't think you have the courage to look at the stats. That is the entirety of your argument: you don't know the stats, because if you did, you'd be calling for your own war criminals to be immediately shipped off to The Hague where they belong.
"But everyone also does it" is the argument of a kindergartener.
The notion that a citizen of a war-crime committing nation can only have justice if they also demand that other war-crime committing nations face justice, is a dire fallacy.
You cannot, as an American citizen, do anything at all effective about Russia or China or India until you have prosecuted your own war criminals. You simply do not have the moral standing in the world, any more: the entire world sees the crimes of the American people, even if they don't.
Only then will the appropriate precedent be set for others to face justice too.
The whataboutism is why there is no justice.
First, we citizens jail our own war criminals. Only then will we have the tools go go after theirs. There is no other appropriate order of events.
All you do, otherwise, is justify your own states' war crimes without having the moral authority to go after any other states war crimes.
Given the enormous magnitude of the war crimes, crimes against humanity, and violations of human rights at massive scales that the 5-eyes nations have committed THIS CENTURY, there is no higher priority than for us to get on with it and start prosecuting our own war criminals first.
The moral authority you think exists, simply does not exist. Ours are the worst-offending states. Other states cannot even come close to matching the magnitude of OUR states' crimes.