NEWSINTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNALS

Usually understood as a time to express gratitude for the people and things we sometimes take for granted, Thanksgiving and this year's holiday season can also have a different meaning.

George W. Bush, the now former president we still and should love to berate, is on tour to promote his new book, and one peace activist organization is making a point of un-thanking him for it wherever he goes.

CODEPINK: Women for Peace (men welcome, too) and their supporters are mobilizing around the country to protest against Bush's self-glorifications of torture and warmongering in his memoir Decision Points.

It's a must-read if you want to know how to get away with and justify horrifications such as waterboarding and starting the two longest wars in US history.

"With his book, media appearances and the opening of his library in Dallas, George Bush is being treated as a respected statesman instead of what he really is: a war criminal," said CODEPINK cofounder Medea Benjamin. "That's why we, the people, have to set the record straight."

CODEPINK's nonviolent actions have included the usual in-person protests, 'setting the record straight' in Milwaukee, Miami and elsewhere. Why not your hometown, too?

But CODEPINK has creatively gone well beyond protests, with a number of inventive and easy ways to un-thank Bush at a bookstores near you, such as printing out special bookmarks that read "Warning: This Book's Author is a War Criminal" and placing them in each copy of Decision Points, or gathering copies of the Bush memoir and moving them to the crime section of the bookstore. Check some visual examples here, and if you go ahead with some book-moving in your local bookstore, consider emailing a photo of your 'work' to the CODEPINK's "Where's W's Book Belong?" contest.

You live in a complex city.

One of the gangs on the other side of town has been systematically killing as many blue eyed residents in their neighborhood as possible. They have also started a gang war against the southern section of the area, leading to countless deaths over the years.

Would you want the local authorities to financially ostracize, arrest and imprison this gang, or to offer them cushy presents in exchange for ending the gang war against the south, while continuing the killings of blue eyed citizens?

Apparently, according to US President Barack Obama and his special envoy to Sudan, Major General (Ret) Scott Gration, there is no need for the former, aggressive shananigans.

For nearly two years, my fellow activists and I have been urging the White House that it must do more to prevent the outbreak of another war in Sudan. Now it seems the administration has listened.

President Obama was the first head of state to commit to attending last month’s special UN session concerning the referendum on independence for Southern Sudan. This vote - fewer than 90 days away - is prescribed in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2005, which ended more than 20 years of civil war. If Sudan is serious about peace, it must not only permit the referendum in an atmosphere free of violence, but must accept the will of the people should they choose independence. A vote for secession will also require that Khartoum works cooperatively with the government of Southern Sudan to resolve all issues regarding borders and oil revenues.

In the months after the first warrants were issued for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, he proceeded to kick aid groups out of the country and ramp up violence against the people of Darfur; proving to the international community that he enjoys ultimate impunity for his actions. Now that a second arrest warrant has been issued, this time on the charge of genocide, Bashir remains confident in the reality that he is free to do as he pleases.

Since the second arrest warrant was issued on the charge of Genocide, Bashir has traveled to countries bound by the Rome Statute, threatened to expel the United Nations/African Union Mission in Darfur (their expulsion would likely mean the expulsion of all aid groups as well from the Darfur region), and is now orchestrating an attack on Kalma, an Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) camp. Thus far, he is absolutely correct in his belief that no country is willing to do what it takes to stop him.

Frustration is growing over the lack of action being taken to stop Bashir and protect the civilians in Darfur. Activists are beginning to wonder exactly what it will take for states to live up to their rhetoric and start taking action. As seems to be the case all too often, there is a lot of talk and very little action. Even Obama’s National Security Strategy addresses the issue, specifically referencing the Responsibility to Protect, and committing the U.S. to protecting civilians:

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued a second arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar Hassan Ahmad al-Bashir on the charge of three counts of genocide against the people of Darfur. The first warrant for al-Bashir’s arrest was issued in March 2009 on the charge of five counts of crimes against humanity (including extermination, torture, and rape), and three counts of war crimes (including intentional attacks on civilians). The ICC attempted to include the counts of genocide in the 2009 warrant, but was unable to satisfy the burden of proof at that time. As is evidenced by this second warrant, an arrest has yet to be made in this case.

The current genocide in the western region of Darfur has been raging since approximately 2003, when President Bashir enlisted the Arab militia known as the Janjaweed (Devils on Horseback) to conduct a calculated campaign of violence against the black Africans in the Darfur region of Sudan. What followed has been a horrific campaign of murder, rape, pillaging and dehumanization of the Darfuri people. While statistics vary, the UN estimates that to date over 300,000 Darfuri civilians have been killed and 2.7 million displaced. Including those who have fled to neighboring countries such as Chad, an estimated 4.7 million have been affected by this ongoing violence.

The situation in Darfur was initially referred to the ICC in 2005 by the United Nations Security Council. Realizing the need to respond to the violence, the Security Council saw a criminal investigation as their best option. As the United States has yet to sign and ratify the Rome Statute, which would recognize the legitimacy of the ICC, the U.S. simply abstained from this vote. This abstention is indicative of the apathetic role the U.S. has continued to play in relation to Darfur.

As a result of the inaction of the international community, Bashir has enjoy

The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) first trial has already experienced more than its share of glitches, and it’s not over yet. The ICC indicted Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, the former leader of the Union of Congolese Patriots (UPC), one of the Democratic Republic of Congo’s many rebel groups, on charges of conscripting child soldiers and using them in hostilities. Human rights groups have documented a wide range of atrocities committed by the UPC, including torture, rape, and ethnically-motivated massacres, but the ICC chose to charge Lubanga only with the child soldier offenses. This narrow set of charges will ensure a shorter, simpler trial and speedier delivery of justice, they argue, although the corresponding gamble is that if they somehow fail to make the case that Lubanga used child soldiers, he’ll be acquitted.

The Lubanga trial has been plagued by delays and mistakes from the start. For those keeping score at home, the first major delay occurred when the trial chamber judges unanimously decided to suspend the trial, in June 2008. Why? Because the prosecution, in the judges’ view, had abused a Rome Statute provision allowing them to collect certain documents on condition of confidentiality. The prosecution amassed some 200 documents that the judges thought might support Lubanga’s defense, but which the prosecution claimed it could not disclose to defense counsel because the document sources were unwilling to be identified. This in turn jeopardized Lubanga’s right to a fair trial, and the trial chamber opted to suspend the trial indefinitely. Miraculously, the prosecution then managed to obtain consent from all of the various entities which had provided the confidential documents, the documents were released to the defense team, and the trial resumed in November 2008.