Myanmar Spring Chronicle – December 1 Perspective
MoeMaKa, December 2, 2024
ICC Actions and the Hopes of the Myanmar People
In the last week of November, reports emerged that the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) had applied for an arrest warrant against Myanmar’s military leader. This news was widely reported in Myanmar media, sparking discussions among the public about whether the military junta leader might soon face arrest and be handed over to the ICC. Based on media reports, political and military organizations, including ethnic armed groups and the National Unity Government (NUG), have been asked for their views, and subsequent discussions about potential impacts and possibilities have also been highlighted in the news.
The Chief Prosecutor of the ICC applied for an arrest warrant against Senior General Min Aung Hlaing based not on crimes committed during the military coup but on atrocities related to the widespread killing of Rohingya civilians in August and September 2017 in northern Rakhine State. After conducting extensive investigations and confirming evidence, the ICC prosecutor submitted the request for the arrest warrant.
The incidents occurred in areas like Maungdaw, Buthidaung, and Rathedaung in northern Rakhine State, where the Myanmar military allegedly carried out “clearance operations” against Rohingya villages, accusing them of harboring Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) militants. These operations reportedly led to the deaths of thousands of Rohingya civilians, including women, the elderly, and children.
Despite the seven years that have passed since these atrocities, questions remain about why the ICC is only now applying for the arrest warrant. While it’s understandable that the ICC’s processes for gathering evidence, conducting hearings, and making decisions take time, comparisons have been drawn with its actions in other cases. For example, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin in March 2023 over war crimes in Ukraine. Similarly, in recent weeks, the ICC announced arrest warrants for Israel’s Prime Minister and a former Defense Minister for alleged war crimes committed during the conflict in Gaza.
The delay in addressing Myanmar’s situation compared to high-profile cases like Ukraine and Gaza raises questions about whether the lack of global attention toward Myanmar has contributed to this delay.
The ICC’s Authority and Global Influence
The ICC’s effectiveness is often questioned due to the lack of support from powerful nations like the United States, China, and Russia, which have not ratified the Rome Statute. The United States has even considered imposing sanctions on ICC judges and prosecutors, reflecting skepticism about the court’s authority and influence. While some European countries support the ICC, its jurisdiction and enforcement capabilities remain limited, especially in countries that have not ratified the Rome Statute.
For Myanmar, the absence of ratification of the Rome Statute raises doubts about the ICC’s ability to prosecute military leaders effectively. Even if an arrest warrant is issued, Min Aung Hlaing may avoid arrest simply by not traveling to countries that have ratified the Rome Statute.
Implications for Myanmar’s Resistance
Ethnic armed organizations and groups like the NUG may view the ICC warrant as less significant than other pressing objectives in their fight against the military junta. While the news may boost morale among pro-democracy supporters, the reality of achieving tangible outcomes remains uncertain.
Myanmar’s media should present realistic perspectives and potential outcomes rather than fostering overly optimistic expectations. While maintaining high spirits is essential for the revolution, building sustainable hope grounded in reality may prove more beneficial for the long-term struggle.