tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20537576.post114365553667990722..comments2023-11-03T04:37:43.106-07:00Comments on Security Dilemmas: Charles Taylor, International Justice, and Amnesty DealsSeth Weinbergerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02120373717676117647noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20537576.post-1143834388646451282006-03-31T11:46:00.000-08:002006-03-31T11:46:00.000-08:00Geoff (and Seth, of course),"Sometimes justice is ...Geoff (and Seth, of course),<BR/><BR/>"Sometimes justice is a luxury we can't afford."<BR/><BR/>I absolutely disagree. Perhaps I just don't understand what definition of "justice" you're using there. I would argue that if justice ever appears to be a luxury we can't afford then we have created a fundamentally unethical system that needs to be replaced.<BR/><BR/>And you've unnecessarily limited the options. Why is abdication necessarily the first step in future cases? Maybe what we've learned here is that, in cases of fundamental human rights violations, sovereignty is a secondary consideration. <BR/><BR/>If you want to advance a utilitarian argument, why not this one: stop waiting around for abdication and even more lives will be saved?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20537576.post-1143760425165773582006-03-30T15:13:00.000-08:002006-03-30T15:13:00.000-08:00Plea bargaining analogy: maybe. But domestic leg...Plea bargaining analogy: maybe. But domestic legal systems don't offer plea bargains to just anyone. They offer plea bargains to secondary (or tertiary or...) players in order to get the primary ones. <BR/><BR/>You further suggest that sovereign immunity should be porous. If so, why assume states' options must be passive? In other words, you suggest that the alternative to 1) watching tyrants while doing nothing is 2)watching tyrants while hoping they step down. <BR/> <BR/>However, it's a pretty clear point of international law that sovereignty resides with the population. So, if a government is clearly violating the basic rights (in Liberia: physical security in its most fundamental form) of its population, then that government arguably has no legitimate claim to represent the people's sovereignty. Therefore, who cares about "sovereign" immunity?<BR/><BR/>The great powers had an obligation to ring Taylor's doorbell in Monrovia and haul him off to the Hague. The people of Liberia deserve no less. Taylor deserves no more. <BR/><BR/>If the people of Liberia or some other tyranny need relief, they need it now, not when their oppressor decides it's convenient for him to step down.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com