IThe Austrian Minister for European Affairs Carolina Edtstadler clarified the concept of “neutral country”:
“Austria is militarily neutral, but not politically neutral. We stand in solidarity with the Ukrainian people and support them humanitarianly and economically, but not in terms of arms supplies.
If Putin comes to Austria, he will be arrested according to our obligations under international law and criminal law. As a criminal judge in my past civil profession, the ICC’s issuing of this international arrest warrant means that if Putin sets foot on Austrian soil, he must be arrested”.
Statements from various nations of the world follow, declaring that if Putin set foot in their country, they would arrest him. However, there are some substantial details that seem to escape the emphasis on being determined and fair.
First of all, the sentences of the ICC against Putin and the senator Maria Lvova Belova (minister of the family), where the two were accused of “deportation of children”, are very deficient and their political character is clear. The accusations are based mainly on the fact that the “kidnapped” children are because they had to be taken in his “free” Ukrainian and not on the occupier’s soil. For the rest, the sentence is the result of a biased ideological vision and is not based on specific directly identified facts. As we have seen previously, the evidence was all obtained remotely and via the internet.
Furthermore, we are faced with the president of a country, an authority that covers one of his political functions. Even if Austria declares itself neutral, the arrest of the Russian prime minister would not go without serious consequences and Moscow has already declared that this would amount to an act of war.
The sentences of the ICC, as was the case for the Nuremberg tribunal, should be issued after the war and not during the conflict. It is very clear and only those who are in bad faith do not see it: the trials for war crimes carried out during the conflicts sharpen the confrontation and delay the armistice.
It is also necessary to remember that, in the case of the war in Syria, this type of sentences handed down to President Assad, as well as the complaints of the ‘thousandth destroyed hospital‘ by the Syrian forces, have always appeared at the right time, i.e. when they served to increase sanctions or prevent the peaceful resolution of the conflict.
Finally, it is not irrelevant, but it is substantial that, in reality, the ICC ruling legally should have no effect in the case of Ukraine and Russia, since these two countries have not acceded to the treaty and the recognition of the jurisdiction of the ICC.
****
note to margin:
Related: West calls for Putin’s arrest for (false) ‘deportation of children’