The Controveries of War Crimes

Last Wednesday, I attended the Becker-Rose Café Series talk given by Professor Ohlin, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the Cornell Law School. Professor Ohlin focuses on criminal law, both domestic and international.

The word cloud for this talk asked for names of war criminals. Most of the discussion was centered around the recent bombing of a hospital in Afghanistan and whether or not we can classify the act as an international war crime. Patients as well as volunteers with Doctors Without Borders were killed in the incident. Some students in the audience at the talk offered suggestions for how the US can take responsibility for the bombing. One mentioned accepting a trade embargo, another offering to pay monetary sanctions. Since news broke last week of the incident, President Obama has since issued an apology and the US has indeed gone with the latter option. It is amazing how many different factors can be at play in a situation like this.

Professor Ohlin proceeded to discuss extensively the International Criminal Court (ICC). It was a bit tricky for me to wrap my head around all of the terms and conditions. However, I gathered that the ICC has a difficult job to do and that making decisions on the complex cases that they must review is not easy. Despite rulings that the Court makes that may be in a country’s best interest, they are not always carried through.

From this talk, I left with a greater appreciation for international policy and politics. The bombing of the Afghan hospital was an extremely unfortunate event. I wish I knew more of the details of what happened. The most that I feel that is in my power to do in the present moment is to acknowledge that human lives were lost. While we can certainly discuss such events from different views and perspectives, perhaps it is best to leave the final say in the hands of the experts.

One thought on “The Controveries of War Crimes

  1. This Becker-Rose Cafe seems like a very informative one. The ICC definitely must deal with very complex issues. One thing I’ve never understood is how it can objectively judge a case. It seems like the rules the ICC follows must somehow be fair to all countries involved, which is a nontrivial task. I’d be interested to go to another cafe on this topic of international laws.

Leave a Reply