French Push U.N. to Seek War Crimes Case in Syria

International New York Times | 4 April 2014

UNITED NATIONS — France has taken the first steps toward proposing a Security Council resolution that would refer Syria to the International Criminal Court for the prosecution of war crimes, diplomats said Friday, an action long sought by rights advocates.

Although Russia might well veto such a resolution, the diplomats said, it could still embarrass the Kremlin, the Syrian government’s most important foreign supporter, at a time when the Russians already face isolation over the crisis in Ukraine. The diplomats also cautioned that such a resolution risked alienating the Russians, whose cooperation in pressuring the Syrian government is considered vital.

The diplomats spoke on the condition of anonymity because a draft of the resolution is still under negotiation.

Russia has vetoed three Security Council resolutions that would have imposed sanctions on the Syrian government for its conduct over the course of the conflict, now in its fourth year. But the French effort would be the first time that the 15-member council took action to hold suspected war criminals accountable. The council has the power to authorize the International Criminal Court in The Hague to prosecute, even though Syria is not a party to the treaty that created the court.

• 
  News, analysis and photos of the conflict that has left more than 100,000 dead and millions displaced.

France first signaled its intentions on Thursday by circulating to all council members a report that compiles 55,000 photographs said to have emerged from the secret jails of Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, showing evidence of torture.

The report was paid for by Qatar, one of Mr. Assad’s fiercest critics, and made public this year. It has to be verified by the United Nations Human Rights Council, though its own Commission of Inquiry has found evidence of government-sanctioned torture, along with evidence of war crimes by some of Mr. Assad’s adversaries, particularly Islamist groups allied with Al Qaeda.

The commission has also compiled a confidential list of suspected war criminals. The High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, is scheduled to brief the council on Tuesday; her remarks will include the rights abuses in Syria.

Gérard Araud, France’s ambassador to the United Nations, declined to comment on the specific language of a draft resolution. But in an interview on Friday he said, “We do think it’s time for accountability, by referring to the I.C.C.”

The efforts partly reflect frustration among Western members of the council over its inability to take punitive measures against Syria for blocking United Nations agencies from delivering food and medicine to people trapped by the fighting.

The United Nations has suggested that Syrian obstructionism violates international humanitarian law, just as it defies a legally binding Security Council aid resolution that passed on Feb. 22 with Russian support. France and other members of the council had vowed to take “further steps” in the event of noncompliance, as the resolution provides.

One council diplomat said it was premature to assume a Russian veto, considering how Russia surprised skeptics by joining in the approval of the aid resolution. His comments underscored the council’s difficulties in trying to be effective. “It’s right to begin in this vein,” the diplomat said. “If we didn’t, we might as well just pack up and go home.” A spokesman for the Russian mission declined to comment.

The United States faces a politically delicate issue in supporting such a resolution because of the disputed Golan Heights, which have been claimed by both Syria and Israel for four decades, so any inquiry into Syrian territory could potentially implicate Israel. Diplomats said the proposed draft language bypasses that quandary by specifying accountability for war crimes only since March 2011, when the Syrian conflict began.

An American official declined to comment on the merits of referring Syria to the court, saying only that diplomats were discussing “transitional justice tools” and “broader processes related to truth, reconciliation, and redress for victims.”