The lack of US support for the International Criminal Court which officially came into force on 1st July is analyzed in a front-page article published by Le Monde (2/7), and also in an editorial dedicated to the fraught relations between the USA and Europe on this issue. “Washington uses its veto in the UN Security Council to combat the International Criminal Court”, emphasizes Le Monde, referring to the opposition expressed by the USA, during the last meeting of the UN Security Council, to any prolongation of the mission in Bosnia for a further six months. “Washington says the front-page article wanted in this way to protest against the powers attributed to the International Criminal Court, which (…) was created to judge persons accused of genocide or war crimes. The USA says it does not want American troops on peace-keeping missions and the personnel of other countries that have not ratified its statute to be arraigned before this tribunal”. The importance of the new Court for the current international scenario is analyzed in the editorial of the same French paper, stressing that the “turning point” consists in an “evolution of international law, begun a dozen years ago, which aims at limiting the principle of state sovereignty (…). The creation of the International Criminal Court means the end of judicial immunity from which many perpetrators of genocide and other major criminals on the international scene have hitherto been able to benefit”. Of course, admits Le Monde, “the Court is still far from being universal”, given that of the 139 countries that signed its founding Treaty only 74 have so far ratified it. “Taking a defensive position behind the defence of national sovereignty comments the French daily – the major powers are refusing to recognise the Court“ , which remains “a creature of Europe and of an international civil society composed of hundreds of NGOs which have never stopped campaigning for the establishment of this tribunal”. Declaring its own scepticism about the real effectiveness of an institution like the International Criminal court, the Herald Tribune (3/7) warns against “premature celebrations” and points out: “The Court may succeed in judging war criminals but without greater checks and balances on the road of democracy it could also persecute the innocent”. The air disaster in Germany on 1st July is given ample coverage in the German press. Among the first comments is an article in the Frankfurter Rundschau of 3/7: “ If, as is often now frequently the case, a human error is ascertained at the origin of the tragedy“, the paper says, “ this demonstrates that with the growth in air traffic and in the numbers of people flying, the accidents are also increasing. And the pressure on pilots and crews is also growing“. Numerous articles are also devoted to the recent G8 summit in Canada, which approved an action plan for Africa: “ Scepticism is always de rigueur when solemn declarations of intent are issued at major international meetings“, comments Peter Sturm in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung ( FAZ) of 2/7. “ But if the industrialized countries become conscious of the fact that Africa too is an important element for the world economy, the summit in Kananaskis will have served some purpose. Although it is right to claim that the African countries themselves do something for a better future he continues – a self-criticism of what the industrialized countries are doing is also necessary. For many of them, globalization is only a synonym for free-marketeering“. Writing in the Frankfurter Rundschau of 27/6 Brigitte Kols comments on the action plan as follows: “ There are good reasons for not blocking the initiative. Whatever the States may do at the summits, the hopes spring from the grassroots. It’s there that Africa is working on itself and for itself“. “ Africa’s last chance“, is the headline carried by the weekly Spiegel no. 27/2002 of 1/7: “ In just 75 minutes the representatives of the rich and the poor signed an accord prepared in months of work that restores Africa to the centre of international attention”, write Ulrich Deupmann, Harald Schumann and Birgit Schwarz. “Democratization, reform of state structures, economic freedom and a new prosperity for Africa: is it possible?“, ask the authors. “ The signs of change are evident in many places“, they point out. “ But if the dream of an African renaissance is to become a reality, the governments of Africa must demonstrate they are really capable of pushing through the necessary reforms“.
