<Since "aggression" is already contained in the Article 9 of the Rome Ruling, it does not need any amendment to be considered, so Article 121 is irrelevant.>
I looked at many sites, when writing my original post on the ICC. Nobody, other than the U.S. government, interprets it the way you have. Everybody else (the ICC itself, the UN, the EU, every State that has ratified it, every human rights organization) agrees, the Rome Statute does not define, or include in the jurisdiction of the ICC, the crime of aggression. The British, Australians, Canadians, Mexicans, they all disagree with the official U.S. interpretation.
This is (yet again) a scare tactic being used by the U.S. government, claiming that the ICC has infinite uncontrolled jurisdiction to do anything to anybody. Once again, the U.S. finds itself alone, claiming things that the rest of the international community (all except Israel) disagrees with. |
