Bashing Bashir

One cannot go a day without hearing news of some type of international crisis, in fact, it has been a rather saddening signifier of our times but when did it become the International Criminal Court's responsibility to scapegoat the African continent as the only place their jurisdiction seems to find a function. Serving as the permanent tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression, it has only officially opened investigations against Northern Uganda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic and Darfur. Hmm? Any person who keeps up with the Jones' of international affairs could easily name several other places where their arms of justice could extend but as of July 1 2002, the date it's treaty the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court came into being, only African states have been addressed.
Now, I am not saying that a court with this type of power should not go after dictators who abuse their power and resources to perputrate crimes against humanity, but I am saying that this type of scapegoating and fear-mongering, and, dare I say, 20th century colonialism, simply sets the stage for bringing more chaos into the already unstable Darfur region. Isn't it supposed to be about bringing justice in the name of peace/humanity/civility, not justice in the name of creating an international laughing stock of unstable African and Arab countries as a polical ploys.
So far, it has issued 13 warrants of arrest but has only four suspects in its cells while seven remain free. All the suspects in ICC cells are from Africa. They are Thomas Lubanga, Germain Katanga, Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui, Jean Pierre Bemba and ex-Liberian President Charles Taylor, who is being tried under the Special Court for Sierra Leone.
As I mentioned earlier, my beef with this whole situation is not that he's being served with the warrant, it's the timing of the warrant given the Sudan's precarious state and the history of the ICC investigations. This same sentiment can be heard from the many African and Arab states and ministries that have spoken out against the warrant, that have invited the President to their countries (Egpyt, Eritrea, Libya, Saudi Arabia, the Arab League meeting in Qatar), and have also refused to acknowledge the authority of the ICC. Four major global organisations: the Arab League, the African Union, the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, and the Non-Aligned Movement are all against the Bashir warrant. In diplomatic terms, the UN Security Council cannot ignore even one of these organisations.
Bashir has been very adamant in not letting the warrant affect him but I think it's a serious matter when an international court issues the arrest warrant of the 1st sitting head of state. And I wonder--if they were to prosecute, strip Bashir of his position, jail him, would their be as much effort to reform from the same international communities that called for his dismissal. Bashir feared that certain foreign aid groups in Sudan were spying and collecting information for the warrant so he removed them--this neither helped him, the country or the people. This is the type of chain reaction that has to be prevented.
It's common knowledge that African states are continously going through evolution seeing as how the whole continent has faced the wrath of European and Arab imperialism and colonialism. This evolution has to be taken into account with situations such as what do with heads of state of war torn countries. I don't believe, given their histories, that it will ever been taken likely when a European based organization tries to exert authoritative force on African countries so maybe serving warrants should be left up to a humanitarian court serving the African and Arab countries of the continent. Just a thought.