VIENNA, May 30, 2002 ( – In an address to the Permanent Council of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) U.S. diplomat Douglas Davidson gave more details on the US formal notification to the UN that it would not become a party to the Rome Statute creating the International Criminal Court (ICC).  In the May 9 address, obtained by LifeSite, Davidson noted that the ICC treaty “has significant defects” which “may constrain the willingness of the U.S. and perhaps other nations to engage in military operations, such as peacekeeping, because military personnel would be at risk of investigation or prosecution by the ICC.”  Davidson, the charge d’affaires at the U.S. Mission to the OSCE, noted the following “defects” with the ICC:  – with its claim to jurisdiction over the nationals of States not party to the agreement, it threatens the principles of national sovereignty   – The treaty would make the ICC a final arbiter of whether a State’s investigations or trials are “genuine” despite widely divergent, yet legitimate, domestic judicial systems around the world – the ICC and prosecutor are not accountable to a democratically elected body or to the UN Security Council; the court thus lacks fundamental checks and balances. This will easily lead to politically motivated decisions – The ICC also creates the potential for conflict with the UN Charter, which provides that the Security Council determines what is an act of aggression   Davidson warned that the risk of prosecution of US military personnel by the ICC “will also necessarily complicate U.S. military cooperation with other nations who are parties to the Rome Statute.” It remains to be seen what this means for the traditional close military co-operation between the U.S. and Canada which has been a strong advocate of the ICC.  In related news, the Financial Times reports that “behind closed doors, John Negroponte, US ambassador to the UN, warned members of the Security Council that the US would pull its observers and police from the UN’s peacekeeping operations in East Timor if the 15-member group did not amend a resolution to outlaw the international prosecution of UN personnel working in the newly established country, however unlikely the prospect.  The tactic failed when other members of the Security Council – especially France and the UK, which like the rest of the EU strongly support the court – refused to accept the US amendment and Washington dropped the clause.”  See the Financial Times coverage at:   See related LifeSite coverage:  BUSH ISSUES FORMAL REJECTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT