Daniel Hannan MEP is an intelligent person, and he writes well. Often he says things about the EU that most politicians do not have the courage to say. But sometimes he goes too far, expresses things in unnecessarily inflammatory ways, gets into trouble - and occasionally, says some things that are astonishingly stupid. His recent article, headlined The International Criminal Court is a threat to democracy, was not simply ill-timed and ill-judged, it was extraordinarily absurd.
First, let me emphasise that you will not find anyone more pro-American than me. I have lived in Washington, DC and visit the US regularly. Having just returned from another visit to Washington, DC, where I had meetings with people in the State Department and Congress concerning various international human rights issues, I am convinced that no government has shown more commitment to the promotion of human rights and democracy than the US. The Czechs, the Dutch and the Scandinavians do some very good things, Canada occasionally pops up, and the UK sporadically gets into gear, with a bit of pushing from Parliament and activists - but I have not met as many officials, staff and elected politicians with the commitment to the values of human rights and democracy as I have in Washington, DC. The US is far from perfect, and there have been some shocking inconsistencies, but overall it sets an example for human rights and democracy promotion which our FCO could learn from. So, I am a strong friend of the US.
Second, I do understand why - especially in the climate of anti-Americanism in which we leave - the US is nervous about the possibility of cranks misusing the ICC to bring war crimes charges against President Bush or other US leaders. And I understand why people like Hannan may be sceptical.
That said, to suggest, as Hannan did, that the prosecution of Sudan's leader Omar al-Bashir - a major step forward which few expected - is "a fearful blow" against national sovereignty, a "threat to democracy" and an act which makes "the world a darker and more dangerous place" is the height of irrational hysteria. Hannan says that "indicting him [Bashir] amounts to a declaration of war". Well, I don't know if that is correct - when we prosecute murderers in this country, are we declaring "war" on all their family, neighbours and friends? And even if it is, should we seriously just look away when genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes take place?
The Bashir case sets a precedent upon which we should build, not seek to derail and destroy. There is now an increased prospect of bringing Robert Mugabe, and the Burmese Generals, to the ICC. Surely, we should be thinking - when the ICC review takes place next year - how can we put in place safeguards to ensure that the institution, and other universal jurisdictional mechanisms, are used for what they are intended - to bring mass murderers, war criminals and the perpetrators of crimes against humanity and genocide - to justice, and not misused and twisted by anti-American or anti-British elements? We should focus on improving these mechanisms in a way which would reassure US concerns, and enable the US to play its rightful lead role in such an institution. Hannan's hysteria - and the absence of a rational reasoned argument in his article - does him no favours. I would recommend people read Lord Alton's recent remarks in the House of Lords, in contrast to Hannan's outburst.
