war crimes – Opinions

United-States-Court-House-Cou-302702764-300x300

April 28, Chris Jenks, SMU Dallas Dedman Law School professor and expert on military justice, for a commentary about a loophole in the U.S. War Crimes Act that would allow war criminals safe haven on American soil. Published in Inside Sources under the heading Loophole Allows Safe Haven for War Crimes Violators on U.S. Soil: https://bit.ly/3F3i5q3

Earlier this month President Biden ratcheted up the rhetoric and called for a “wartime trial” of Russian President Vladimir Putin. The president’s comments followed Secretary of State Antony Blinken condemning “atrocities by Kremlin forces in Bucha and across Ukraine” and stressing that the United States was “pursuing accountability using every tool available.”

All this tough talk is a façade — a superficial exterior masking the hollowness within. In terms of Blinken’s analogy, the U.S. war crimes tool box is empty, and willfully so. That’s because for more than 70 years, the United States has doggedly refused to meet its obligation under the 1949 Geneva Conventions to enact legislation to hold accountable those who commit serious law of war violations.

Continue reading “Loophole Allows Safe Haven for War Crimes Violators on U.S. Soil”

March 4, Anthony Colangelo, Professor of Law at the SMU Dallas Dedman School of Law, for a commentary outlining the international laws that make it possible to prosecute Vladimir Putin for various war crimes. Published in The Hill under the heading Putin can be prosecuted for crimes of aggression — but likely not any time soon: https://bit.ly/3KccW0a

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a clear violation of international law that opens the door to prosecuting Russian President Vladimir Putin down the road. The United Nations Charter prohibits aggressive use of force, and Russia has no valid claim that it is using force in self-defense. To assert self-defense, a state must be the victim of an actual or imminent armed attack. No facts support a claim that Russia is the victim of such an attack.

The ban on aggressive use of force is such a fundamental element of international law that when a state breaches it, its leaders can be held criminally responsible. After World War II, dozens of political and military leaders of Germany and Japan were convicted of the crime of aggression by international tribunals set up in Nuremberg and Tokyo.

Continue reading “Putin can be prosecuted for crimes of aggression — but likely not any time soon”