Rohingya riddle
Re: "ICC's leap in the dark", (Editorial, Sept 10).
The editorial overlooks various important arguments.
The International Criminal Court decided to open investigations against (not as the editorial says "arrest, deport and try") Myanmar's political and military leadership regarding the deportation of 700,000 Rohingya. The court justified its decision based on Bangladesh being a neighbouring country, recipient of most of the stream of refugees, and member of the ICC.
How this will create more disorder, as the editorial argues, it does not clarify. It says the reason countries like China, US, Russia and Thailand did not join the ICC in 2000 was fear for "mission creep". That fear does not at all justify acceptance of the admitted failure of Asean to act, nor does it justify impunity.
With non-collaboration, Asean and its 2019 chair, Thailand, would be as much complicit in the crimes as Aung San Suu Kyi by keeping silent, and secretly approving the deportation. If Thailand would indeed act out of this fear, it would implicitly accept the outrageous reasoning of Myanmar that it is "– yes, the victim – of an organised international conspiracy", as the editorial states.
The late Dr Surin Pitsuwan said about the Responsibility to Protect ("R2P"), in the framework of human security, that it is "a rather comprehensive concept, but it will not be in competition with the issue of state sovereignty. In fact, it is making sovereignty more meaningful because state security, state sovereignty, also would involve responsibility".
A global rule of law does not "creep" into sovereignty to undermine it, but strengthens it when it takes up more responsibility. A special quality of Asean highlighted by Dr Surin is what he called its convening power.
Asean could be advised by the Bangkok Post to convene a dialogue between all parties, including the ICC, to assess the pros and cons of all options in a forward-looking perspective, and find solutions based on principles not on fear.