Afrasianet - The United States, knowing that the decision is not enforceable, intended to reveal publicly its affiliation with the International Criminal Court, even though it did not sign its statute in Rome.
With the issuance of the International Criminal Court's decision to arrest Russian President Vladimir Putin as a war criminal, it confirms once again that the mood of international justice has become 100 percent American.
Isn't it more appropriate for the International Criminal Court to sue George Bush Jr. and Tony Blair as war criminals on the occasion of the twentieth anniversary of their invasion of Iraq, whose files reveal the extent of the devastation and destruction that the country suffered based on false accusations?
The decision to arrest Putin coincided with the anniversary of the American invasion, revealing the extent of the imbalance that affected international institutions and organizations because the United States singled out the world as a single pole based on its military power without there being moral rules through which others could prevent it from waging senseless wars, pushing innocent peoples its price.
Colin Powell, who was US Secretary of State at the time of the invasion, had previously admitted that he had lied to the United Nations General Assembly about the weapons of mass destruction that Iraq was said to possess.
When George Bush and Tony Blair escape accountability from the international community and Putin is highlighted as an enemy of the United States, that kind of justice will be questionable.
In Britain, Tony Blair was condemned by a committee of Parliament for lying to the nation and for engaging the British army in a war of aggression that was not necessary for Britain's security or for global security.
Likewise, George Bush himself always boasted that overthrowing Saddam Hussein's regime was a goal worthy of war.
All the documents that are disclosed confirm that the decision to invade was premeditated and planned, and the false reasons that were circulated are nothing but slogans whose promoters know that they are more like myths that no one will believe. Iraq, which was a state before the invasion, is no longer so after it.
As for his people, who were subjected to various forms of killing, torture, abuse, humiliation, and starvation, their social fabric was torn apart through the imposition of a sectarian political system on them that started to run the machine of destruction after the Americans and the British withdrew their soldiers.
President Bush said early on, “Mission is over,” and he means what he says. The mission in which Saddam Hussein's regime was overthrown will end with the erasure of the factors for Iraq's restoration of its existence, that is, its ability to be a state again.
It will be a virtual state on paper, which its people will not recognize. Everything that happened to Iraq was not visible to the International Criminal Court.
Outside the framework of international legitimacy, the armies of the United States, Britain, and allied countries have committed crimes against humanity, each of which outweighs the other in its ugliness.
The reactions reveal the level of moral inferiority that the international community has reached. The war in Ukraine is justified by the disagreement between two countries that were once one. As for the American-British invasion, there is no justification for it other than the desire to destroy a country, overthrow a political regime, and remove a people from history.
And if Putin is a war criminal, why isn't Volodymyr Zelensky the president of Ukraine as well? Zelensky is also a warmonger.
It was when he threatened Russia with NATO missiles.
But before that, weren't Bush Jr. and Blair war criminals on the day they destroyed an independent country that lost its sovereignty because of their invasion and became a playground for terrorist organizations?
The International Criminal Court acted on banal American orders that did not take into account the fact that Putin is the head of a superpower, which is a nuclear power. Who, for example, would dare to arrest him?
Putting international justice in a narrow category is intended to belittle it and put it in a mockery. It is true that the matter does not exceed the symbolic aspect, but it is a sign intended to mislead justice, or at least to weaken it.
When George Bush and Tony Blair escape accountability from the international community and Putin is highlighted as an enemy of the United States, that kind of justice will be questionable.
Justice with one eye and a balance that cannot be trusted.
It is not excluded here that the United States, knowing that the decision is not enforceable, intended to reveal publicly its affiliation with the International Criminal Court, even though it did not sign its system in Rome and had previously imposed sanctions on its senior officials.
Ukraine's war devoured the independent European decision with its flames, and now it is devouring international justice.