in

NYT Presents Strong Case for a War-Crimes Prosecution Against Russia

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.

Eric Zuesse

Whereas numerous instances of U.S. war-crimes have been documented in some news-reports well enough to be successfully prosecuted in international war-crimes tribunals (but the U.N.-authorized agency the International Criminal Court cannot prosecute U.S. war-crimes but only war-crimes by third-world countries’ leaders), such well-evidenced instances by Russia are far rarer. However, on May 19th the New York Times presented precisely such an instance, under the headline “New Evidence Shows How Russian Soldiers Executed Men in Bucha”. Local security-cameras there recorded the frog-marching to their death of nine Ukrainian men who weren’t in Ukraine’s official armed forces but who had become armed to fight against the invading Russian soldiers in Bucha, and who were then executed by specifically identified Russian soldiers and their corpses abandoned on the ground as Russia’s soldiers left Bucha. Locals also told the NYT’s reporters what they had seen, and it fit with what those security cameras showed. The NYT reported:

The execution of the captured fighters and the homeowner in Bucha “is the kind of incident that could become a strong case for war crimes prosecution,” said Stephen Rapp, former United States ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues. The captives, having been disarmed and taken into custody by the Russians, were “outside of combat,” under the laws of war, Mr. Rapp said. According to the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross, such laws mean that prisoners must be treated humanely and protected from mistreatment in all circumstances.

In addition to the soldiers who shot the men, their commanders could be charged if they knew about the killings and failed to act to prevent or punish the conduct, Mr. Rapp said.  

However, Ellen Ioanes at Vox posted on April 9th an excellent article, “Here’s what the ICC can actually do about Putin’s war crimes”, and documented in detail that the consequence would be nothing except bad publicity which the U.S. and its allies could exploit, but even that would entail “a lot of hypocrisy” because:

one of the most vocal nations suggesting Putin be tried at the Hague — the United States — isn’t itself a party to the ICC. The US government voted against the ICC during the Rome Conference in 1998; former President Bill Clinton signed on to the Rome Statute in 2000 but never submitted it to Congress for ratification. Former President George W. Bush in 2002 notified then-UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan that the US would not ratify the Rome Statute and didn’t have to abide by any of its provisions.

The U.S. Government, and many of its allies (such as the post-U.S.-coup-in-Ukraine’s government ever since 2014) perpetrate war-crimes (such as this) far more heinous than what the NYT reports there, but that doesn’t excuse what these Russian soldiers did. None of these war-crimes will be able to be successfully prosecuted.  

Here is the reason why the ICC, and the U.N. itself, turned out to be this way (Ioanes’s article provided only a superficial account regarding that matter — “A permanent international court is still relatively new,” etc. — but the actual cause, or reason, goes all the way back to answering how and why that has turned out to be the case, and this requires history going back to the 1940s):

Though the United Nations had first been conceived by U.S. President FDR in 1941 only shortly before the U.S. itself famously entered WW II on “a date which will live in infamy”; and though FDR developed, prior to his death on 12 April 1945, a remarkably detailed plan for what the U.N. would be and for what its Charter would need to include, his immediate successor, Harry S. Truman, while he was at the Potsdam Conference with Churchill and Stalin in July 1945, became persuaded by his hero, General Dwight David Eisenhower, that if the U.S. would not conquer the Soviet Union, then the Soviet Union would conquer the United States; and, so, on 25 July 1945, Truman made the decision (which soon thereafter became irrevocable) to set the U.S. Government onto the path of world-domination, to conquering the Soviet Union, and he even decided to demand of Stalin, regarding eastern European countries that the Soviet Union had freed from Hitler’s grip, that “I told Stalin until we had free access to those countries and our nationals had their property rights restored, so far as we were concerned ther’d never be recognition. He seems to like it when I hit him with a hammer.” Stalin was shocked at this turn of events, because he knew, in general terms, what FDR had been intending for the U.N. to be — a democratic federation of all nations which would terminate all imperialisms and be restricted to addressing only international relations (thereby excluding anything that pertains to intranational matters, such as Truman insisted upon) — and he still hoped, even for a few months afterwards, that Truman wouldn’t turn out to be a 180-degree reversal of what FDR had been, but thereafter Stalin gave up altogether on any such hope, and knew that the U.S. was now at war against the Soviet Union. Tragically, Truman, instead of FDR, oversaw, and basically dominated, the creation of the U.N., and so it turned out to be a toothless tiger, nothing like what FDR had intended, which would have been the international democracy of nations and possessed of a practical monopoly of geostrategic weaponry and international armed force, and also including, at the earliest practicable date, an international criminal court, which would try not only the international crimes by the former Axis powers, but the international crimes by the former Allied powers. The U.N. would have been fundamentally different than it is.

And, so, though there do exist international war-crimes cases regarding which the solidly documented historical record is sufficiently complete for an unprejudiced and trustworthy conviction to be possible, it cannot happen unless and until all of the bad history since 12 April 1945 (FDR’s death) has become effectively condemned, repudiated, and reversed, by enough of the world’s nations, so that the needed type of world government (international laws and their enforcement and juridical handling), replacing all of the existing imperialisms, becomes finally instituted (which was FDR’s obsession from 1941 on). However, even today — after all of these many decades of bad history — no one is even so much as talking about this.

One of the experts that Ioanes quoted said “‘It really shows a lot of hypocrisy,’ and encourages the perception of ‘justice for thee, not for me’.” And that (“for thee, not for me”) is, really, a pervasive and total impossibility of justice, for anyone. In its place can only be hypocrisy. Perhaps that’s what “liberalism” (which is certainly NOT progressivism) comes down to: hypocritical conservatism. Rule by the aristocracy (the super-rich), everywhere.

What is bad in the past must be publicly acknowledged (no longer lied about), if ever we are to go forward to an authentically better world. If that fails to happen, the world will only continue to get even worse.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s next book (soon to be published) will be AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change. It’s about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.

Report

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.

What do you think?

-34 Points
Upvote Downvote
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
37 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
goedelite
goedelite
May 20, 2022

The greatest war crime was committed by Harry S. Truman in setting the US on the path of empire and aggression.
The New York Times has no credibility, in my view. It is a propaganda organ for the US Empire.

ElMagnifico
ElMagnifico
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
May 20, 2022

“..that was an excellent news-report from the NYT”

That’s exactly the same thought that the CIA agent who wrote it had. Now that you liked it there’s two people who think that way.

ElMagnifico
ElMagnifico
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
May 21, 2022

The fact that it’s a NYT article.

ElMagnifico
ElMagnifico
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
May 21, 2022

“That’s not a reason. It’s an excuse — and hardly a good one.”

…says the utterly clueless commentator who has somehow conveniently managed to forget how the NYT LIED about
Saddam Hussein having WMDs, it’s coverage of the
D.C. Sniper Attacks, how Trump allegedly “ordered police to clear Lafayette Park Protesters”, how a random “Canadian man was an ISIS executioner”, how Trump “ignored Russian bounties on U.S. Soldiers”, how Brian Sicknick was ‘killed’ by Jan. 6 Rioters, how Gabby Giffords’ shooting was “inspired by Sarah Palin” and how the Wuhan Lab Leak was just a ‘Fringe Theory.’

Nigga, please.

Sara
Sara
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
May 21, 2022

I get paid more than $120 to $130 every hour for working on the web. I found out about this activity 3 months prior and subsequent to joining this I have earned effectively $15k from this without having internet working abilities Copy underneath site to check it… http://www.incomehd.com

Last edited 1 month ago by Sara
Jim
Jim
Reply to  goedelite
May 21, 2022

Dont, forget The War criminal Churchill, Eisehower, Rhine meadows, General Patten said “WE defeated the wrong enemy” !
Then there,s Bush, Blair, Howard ! Ffff

Iran-vs-USA good one.jpg
Vera Gottlieb
Vera Gottlieb
Reply to  goedelite
May 22, 2022

The greatest war time crime was Hiroshima and then followed by Nagasaki. The crimes of all times.

Alex
Alex
May 20, 2022

There is no clear proof that russian paratroopers have commited those crimes if there were any crimes commited at all. All looks to me like fabricated blurry stuff

ElMagnifico
ElMagnifico
Reply to  Alex
May 20, 2022

Anyone who knowingly repeats NYT narratives & talking points is beyond despicable, in my honest opinion.

Alex
Alex
Reply to  ElMagnifico
May 20, 2022

Yes, they actually have received pulitzer for covering russiagate. 🙂

ElMagnifico
ElMagnifico
May 20, 2022

Clearly, you reached your zenith as an “investigative historian” when you wrote The Cat in the Hat and Horton Hears A Who! (…that was you, wasn’t it?) The only “strong case” you and your precious buddies over at NYT possess is one of mental diarrhea.

ElMagnifico
ElMagnifico
May 21, 2022

So let me see if I got this straight. You wrote a book denouncing how “America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.” ..and here you are, helping to dupe the public through promoting an article published by one of Amerika’s most notorious purveyors of fake, slanted & manipulated “news.” Perhaps the time has come for you do start writing a little bit less and reading a little bit… Read more »

ElMagnifico
ElMagnifico
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
May 21, 2022

“I see no reason to doubt the veracity of the NYT article’s narrative or the authenticity of its cited evidence.”

Exactly! And precisely therein lies the reason for your utter lack of any credibility insofar as to your claim of being an “investigative historian.”

remo
remo
May 21, 2022

The NYT piece patterns like ‘smell-a-rat’ @ bellingcat’s BUK ‘proofs’ during MH17 atrocity.The FIT-up through JIT shows depths of collusion at the ‘legal’ upper end…so..this here war-crime; is maybe…anyway…’til NYT’s properly report the evidence of the 911 demolitions happening right outside their doors; until then, anything they print is, first instance, considered psyops.

remo
remo
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
May 21, 2022

An advanced media machine must produce excellence at all levels and this presentation is surely an example of excellence. I am not discounting that Russian forces might commit war crimes. It is of no surprise that they do. This may well be one of them. War is atrocious and produces atrocity. But;That the NYT’s sin of omission: to report to the same degree of fact evidence of the 911 demolitions; the 8 years of Donbass civilian casualty; Specifics of the ODESSA Trades Hall massacre as it applies to the Russian people; Evidence of USAID/NATO snipers in the Maidan; Historic CIA… Read more »

John
John
May 21, 2022

I read the article in NYT. Quite convincing, if you simply read it, but critically, it sopen’t add up to anything like evidence, more like a story. THe photos are completely unconvincing, and add nothing to the story about bad russian soldiers. In any case, so what? One case of bad Russian soldiers after years of hit pieces against Russia for no good reason, and without detractions, fairness good manners or diplmacy. All given in support of a single non-representititive (read irresponsible) global hegemony by, er ‘The Globalists’ It’s important in appraising this, to know is how much reporting did… Read more »

remo
remo
Reply to  John
May 21, 2022

Against the grain…how do you mean ?

Richard
Richard
May 21, 2022

The New York Times is a CIA house organ.

Richard
Richard
May 21, 2022

Bidenopoulos is the war criminal.

Onward
Onward
May 21, 2022

Mr Zuesse you have written quite briefly that the NYT article describes a Russian war crime and you present it without the slightest doubt that the Russians are guilty and go on to discuss and link it to the ICC, Truman, FDR, the UN and so on. Straight away I am suspicious because you avoid a detailed analyses of the evidence, the so camera footage and eyewitness accounts. Reading a report in the NYT and assuming the descriptipn therein is genuine without examination of the evidence is unacceptable, and more so because you use the veracity of the later part… Read more »

Seleukas
Seleukas
May 21, 2022

I will take it seriously when the New York times presents a “strong” case of war crimes detailing the almost incalculable instances of deaths, destruction and misery that the USA “regime”, (as all other nations not in the club are referred to by the Empire of Misery), is held accountable . I don’t see that day coming any time soon.

Diana
Diana
May 21, 2022

Why is there no mention here of the eight years that the residents of the Donbass have suffered at the hands of the Ukies? There are estimated to have been around 14,000 killed by them. The leader of Azov has been recorded as boasting that he loves killing, because killing is such fun. Were those not war crimes? Haven’t noticed anyone shouting for them to be tried at the International Tribunal but when it’s Russia, ah yes, that fits the agenda.

Soph
Soph
May 21, 2022

“New evidence…” what about the eyewitness statement of the mayor who said everything was fine, the white bandages on the victims, some had Russian ration packs. Russia knows the eyes of the world (anglosphere) are on them. Therefore, such a spectacular own-goal would be difficult to believe without overwhelming real evidence. Ukraine regularly fabricates audio visual evidence and if it has ‘evidence’ the UN should be presented with it.

Eddy
Eddy
May 22, 2022

Lett me rewind a little here. A few short weeks back, the MSM was plastering videos all around the World of Zelensky’s Government handing out, free of charge, to any Ukrainian citizen that wanted one, even if they didn’t know one of the weapon from the other. Some videos showed us Grand mothers being taught which end was which, and how to hold aim and fire these weapons. Unfortunately, none of these videos, (including any of Eric’s writings) bothered to point out, that during a time of war, ANYONE waving a weapon around, and/or pointing said weapon at you, IS… Read more »

Vera Gottlieb
Vera Gottlieb
May 22, 2022

How about war-time prosecutions against the US??? Two wrongs don’t make one right – but how come the world allows the one ‘wrong’ to literally get away with murder?

Eddy
Eddy
Reply to  Vera Gottlieb
May 23, 2022

Concur totally with your post Vera. IMHO, the U.S. is not in a place to critisize anyone if their own hands are soaked with similar blood. I’m a Vietnam vet, and live thru the war there, witnessing the U.S. murderous actions at first hand. No One will ever convince me, of the innocence of the U.S. NO ONE.

Colin Smith
Colin Smith
May 23, 2022

For my part, examining the photo with as much magnification as is available to me, l cannot for the life of me see any evidence of dead bodies here. There is no blood, nor any other signs of injury. It looks as though these men could just get up and walk away after playing their part. Further, who says that this is an atrocity committed by Russians. We need more information before buying this particular allegation. This war, like any other, is very badly reported, while propaganda and media manipulation are at their height.

Eddy
Eddy
Reply to  Colin Smith
May 23, 2022

My points exactly Colin. Did the CTC video record the action as claimed ? If it did, it would establish very quickly, whether these dead bodies were really shooting at the Russians, and IF they were, they were a LEGITIMATE target. But hey, only the U.S. can kill people without answering for their actions, recently the U.S. Airforce cleared itself from murdering hundreds of innocent people. Hey no probs, not our fault if these idiots chose to place themselves under our bombs. No charges laid, no outrage from the public World wide, just a shrug of the shoulders and continue… Read more »

Ruble under 60 to USD. Milley calls Gerasimov. Blame it on “cosmic cretinism.” $18 Beer. Update 2

What Kind Of Woman Marries A Serial Killer?