Comparing The ICTY And The International Criminal Tribunal For The Former Yugoslavia

When the world famous liberal thinker Francis Fukuyama in his masterpiece declared that we were witnessing the end of the history, he was greeting the new political structure and also the new international environment, which is peaceful[1]. However, developments that occurred after the collapse of the Soviet Union showed us that the dissolution of the Soviets was unexpected. The international society was not ready for peace and Fukuyama’s optimistic assumptions were far from becoming real. Moreover, the international society currently started to realise that the tension and the potential of mass destructive war during the Cold War era had provided a

The Cold War was the name given to the political economic, military and ideological contention that occurred between the United States and its allies and the Soviet Union and their allies after World War II. The two forces never directly engaged in military activity in light of the fact that both had atomic weapons that if utilized, might have had crushing outcomes for both sides. Instead, proxy wars were battled. A proxy war results when contradicting forces utilize outsiders as substitutes for battling each one other and is ordinarily launched by a power that does not itself partake. The Korean and Vietnam wars are two examples of proxy wars on the grounds that the U.S. and the Soviet Union did not directly engage one another however, Soviet endeavors to spread and bring together both Korea and Vietnam under communist rule provoked mediation either by the United States and/or by their allies. These two occasions were simply a few of the impacts of the Cold War in Asia. This paper will examine each war individually and in more detail and endeavor to persuade that the Korean and Vietnam Wars were the immediate aftereffects of Soviet endeavors to expand communist influence in Asia and the United States and their allies' approach of forestalling and holding such endeavors.

As tensions continued to augment profoundly throughout the latter half of the Cold War period, they brought forth a movement from a previous bipolar conflicting course, to one of a more multipolar nature. These tensions were now not only restricted to the Soviet Union and United states, but amongst multiple other nations of the globe. It became a general consensus that a notion of ‘peace’ was sought globally, hence, the emergence of détente. The nature of this idea in the short term conveyed itself to be an act of change for the conflicting nations, however, in the long term it proved to be a blatant continuity, ultimately acting as a ‘mechanism for domestic fortification’ which prompted a more divisive tone. It became apparent that by the prime 1970’s Cold War countries were now seeking a state of relaxation in political and international tension, détente, through measures of diplomacy and negotiation. Actions, influences and treaties such as the Helsinki Final Act of 1975, the establishment of SALT 1, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972 and the Shanghai Communique of 1972 evidently help reinforce that the concept of détente brought a period focused on lessening the tensions of international relations and ultimately achieve political relation for the future of the Cold War, although the success and impact of this era is abhorred by many historians who have concluded that détente didn’t activate any positive changes to the cold war, and was conclusively a failure.

Crimes against the international community are a collection of offences that are recognised by the international community as being of universal concern. However the prosecution of crimes against the international community can be controversial. Such crimes may be committed in the context of military conflict. They may be highly politically motivated, or they may have been ordered or committed by the state itself. The establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2002 was a significant development in the law of crimes against the international community. The independent international court established by the Rome Statute, acts as a last resort for crimes fitting into the three categories of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Due to Australia’s Dualistic system, both the War crimes Act

For almost 15 years the U.S. has been in a constant state of war. Various terrorist organizations, from al-Quade, to the Taliban, and now Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) have maintained our focus so much so that we have almost forgotten about prior threats. Ten years prior to the start of the conflict in the Middle East, the Cold War had officially concluded, ending almost 45 years of server political and military tensions between the U.S. and Russian following WWII. During this period of time, Russia was the central focus of the U.S., although China and North Korea also posed a significant threat. While terrorist threats and activates remain a significant threat, Russia recent annexation of Crimea proves that they are still a very

In 1945 after WWII the United States and the Soviet Union became divided as far as how they felt Europe should be divided. This began the period of conflict called the Cold War. The Cold War was “a state of political hostility between countries characterized by threats, propaganda, and other measures short of open warfare”(dictionary.com).The USSR believed in communism, where the US believed in democracy. The US was between two potentially hostile nations, the US designed a Buffer Zone to prevent any overt acts of aggression.At the end of WWI,I almost all of the eastern European countries were occupied by Russia these countries were known as Satellite States. The distrust between the two nations began at the Yalta Conference which included the three big powers: Churchill (Great Britain),Stalin (Soviet Union), and Roosevelt (United States of America). Stalin wanted more control as far how Europe progressed after WWII, where Roosevelt believed Europe should hold free election and determine their political system and rivalry between the two superpowers and began the Cold War. Some might blame the Americans for the causing for the Cold War because of the American’s wanted to occupy the countries, but the Soviet Union bares the responsibility for the Cold War because of their actions in Eastern Europe, by the military expansionism of Stalin and his successors, and the principles presented in the Iron Curtain Speech .

The first International court is the ICC. The ICC has achieved some limited success with

Despite its name, the Cold War did not actually involve military fighting between the United States and the Soviet Union. However, the Cold War is still an excellent example as to why war can be a result of bargaining failures and explains reasons as to why war occurs. A single person’s rationality can tip the scale between war and peace. The Cold War was essentially a deadlock between the two super powers of that time, the United States and the Soviet Union. Both states expressed desire to maintain and widen their respective spheres of influence around the world. Both states also wanted to prove that their political system is superior; whereas the United States was pro-democracy, the Soviet Union was pro-communism. Although the Cold War was a result of many factor, war can definitely occur due to information problems between two states. Nonetheless, I do believe there is always a range of agreements that is possible between states, as is evidenced by the resolution of the Cuban missile crisis.

The International Criminal Court (ICC), created in 1998 (Thayer and Ibryamova 2010), is responsible for investigating and prosecuting the most extreme cases, including crimes against humanity, aggressive crimes, war crimes, and genocide. The credibility of this institution, however, has been compromised due to the United States revocation of support and membership. Initially it is important to recognize the arguments against the United States becoming a member state of the ICC and what precipitated the U.S. withdrawing its signature from the document that instituted the Court. Once this has been established, addressing and refuting these objections will develop the arguments in favor of ICC membership. Finally, this analysis will lead to

The end of the Cold War brought about the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, paving the way for an unprecedented new paradigm – one characterised by the end of hostilities between the two dominant ideologies: Soviet communism and American liberal capitalism. This dominant new paradigm encouraged the homogenisation of ideas, in the form of exchanging ethos and values along former cultural, ideological and geographical divides. As such, this integration of world societies has earned the title ‘globalisation’, forcing the global community to appear so united as to warrant the metaphor of a global village. (Note: This paragraph pains me to read – I will eventually re-write it.)

The evolution of international criminal justice is important to consider. Two ad-hoc tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal of Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal of Rwanda (ICTR), have facilitated the adoption of the ICC. The ICC came into existence on July 1, 2002. The court operates on the principle of complementarity which means that the court does not function unless a state in question is unable or unwilling to investigate and, if warranted, prosecute for one of the covered crimes. Whereas the ICTY and the ICTR had primary jurisdiction and could supersede state action, the ICC only has the aforementioned

In the pursuit of positive peace for the global community, certain mechanisms are necessary in order to better protect human rights and resolve interstate conflicts. Prior to the events of World War II, a cogent set of laws defining those human rights, much less violations therein were never heard at an international scale. The International Criminal Court has the role as both appellate for justice and voice for peace in the international community but has not yet resolve the contradictory ends of both roles. That contradictory end is that many countries proclaim the necessity of the International Criminal Court as an advocate for conflict resolution and peace advocacy while being resist or outright antagonistic towards the court when their own state has committed those same crimes. To the ends of defending basic universal rights, the International Criminal Court (hereafter ICC) serves that capacity when state level systems cannot or will not act accordingly.

Since the Nuremberg trials, the next international criminal tribunals were established in the 1990s. They were formed with the aim to offer justice against atrocities committed in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. The ICTY was established in1993 while the ICTR was established the year that followed. The ICTY was established as a result of mass atrocities that were carried out in Bosnia, Croatia and Herzegovina

 On May 25, 1993, U.N. Security Council Resolution 827 established an international tribunal charged with prosecuting violations of international law arising from the armed conflicts in the former Yugoslavia. Not since the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials, following World War II has an international court tried individuals accused of crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide. The International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTFY), which was established at The Hague, Netherlands, is widely seen as an important step toward the deterrence of crimes, the establishment of the firm rule of international law, and the promotion of world peace. Yet, from its inception, the tribunal

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is an important organ of the United Nations. Actually it is the UN's principal judicial arm used to foster international peace. It was established after the League of the Nation and its judicial organ the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) were dissolved after the Second World War, in 1946. Its main purpose is to support the UN (which was formed in 1945) in its endeavour in promoting international peace and law . Important to note is the fact that this court, although referred to in a non-technical context as the world court, does not automatically possess compulsory international jurisdiction. The treaty creating this court, referred to as the stature of international