Iraq Prison Abuse Undermines U.S. Hope for War Crimes Waiver

Persistent anger over the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal has led key U.S. allies to oppose a resolution shielding American peacekeeping troops from international prosecution for war crimes, forcing the Bush administration into a diplomatic scramble, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said Tuesday.

For the last two years, the U.N. Security Council has given U.S. troops in Iraq and elsewhere a special exemption from the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, created in 2002. U.S. officials fear that without such an exemption, troops and senior officials would be subject to war crimes prosecutions they consider groundless or politically motivated.

But several countries have begun to balk at extending the exemption for a third year, threatening a major diplomatic upset for the Bush administration at a time when it has been eager to foster international harmony on the divisive issue of Iraq. The current one-year exemption will run out June 30, the date on which the U.S.-led occupation is scheduled to return sovereignty to an interim government.

U.S. diplomats and allies worked Tuesday to win more Security Council support by offering an amendment that would make this the last year for the special waiver, diplomats at the United Nations said. But Powell acknowledged that prospects for the waiver’s extension remained questionable because of the prison scandal.

Powell said in an interview that other nations were acting mainly in response to the physical abuse and humiliation of inmates at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad. He hoped the international court issue would be resolved Thursday, he said, when the administration was expected to learn whether it had the nine votes necessary to win another extension from the 15-member Security Council.

Last year, France, Germany and Syria abstained from a vote on the shield for U.S. forces. But this year, 10 countries have said they might abstain, including France, Germany, China, Brazil, Chile, Spain and Romania. Although no member is expected to vote against the measure, seven or more abstentions would kill it.

“I would just as soon not have to deal with this issue this week,” Powell said. “Abu Ghraib has affected this, the way people view the ICC.”

In addition to the nations that have voiced opposition to a new exemption, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has publicly campaigned against it, citing the inmate abuse.

U.S. officials desperately want Annan’s cooperation on Iraq. But he has sent notes to ambassadors raising “serious doubts” about the legality of another exemption. He said the measure undermined international law and sent an “unfortunate message at any time, but particularly at this time.”

Ninety-four countries have agreed to accept the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, and some of them have accused the United States of hypocrisy in seeking special treatment for its forces. The United States has persuaded 89 countries to sign bilateral agreements exempting U.S. troops in their territory from the court’s jurisdiction. The U.S. has not ratified the international treaty creating the court.

Powell said that although the United States was considering a compromise on a new resolution, it would not agree to any language that could expose U.S. troops to risks of international prosecution.

Procedurally, if the United States fails to win passage of the resolution, it could still try to win immunity for its personnel on a case-by-case basis by attaching an exemption provision to every U.N. resolution related to peacekeeping. Yet this approach is not certain to succeed, and it probably would anger some Security Council members, diplomats said.

U.S. envoys have been pressuring some Security Council members for support, putting several nations in difficult positions, diplomats said. Among them is Romania, which has sought to be a strong ally of the United States, yet cannot afford to alienate court supporters that are members of the European Union, which Romania hopes to join soon.

The International Criminal Court, based in The Hague, was created to prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. But it is intended as a tribunal of last resort that takes on cases only when countries fail to handle them properly, in the eyes of the court.

Because of the strength of the American justice system, advocates say, it is unlikely that U.S. citizens would ever appear before the court. But Bush administration officials argue that U.S. officials and troops are especially vulnerable to abuse of such a tribunal because U.S. forces are assigned peacekeeping duties in dozens of countries.

Times staff writer Maggie Farley in New York contributed to this report.