UN vote may jeopardize shielding of US troops

UNITED NATIONS -- The United States may not have enough UN votes to exempt American soldiers from prosecution by a new global criminal court, with China now questioning the action in view of the prison scandal in Iraq, diplomats said yesterday.

A Security Council draft resolution designed to put US peacekeepers out of the reach of the International Criminal Court expires July 1. A renewal was delayed last week by China, and it is expected to go before the council again after a resolution on Iraq's transition is adopted.

Two years ago, the council voted unanimously in favor of the measure when the Bush administration began to veto UN peacekeeping missions after members hesitated.

Last year, three nations abstained, but this year there are enough abstentions that could bring the resolution perilously close to defeat. A minimum of nine votes in favor is needed for adoption in the 15-member council.

Brazil, Spain, France, and Germany have signaled they would abstain and Chile, Romania, and Benin, as well as China, are considering it.

But some diplomats said the resolution would squeak through because no one wanted to see Washington kill UN peacekeeping missions. "The British say they are holding their noses and voting for it, and others may do the same," said one envoy.

But China's position is an unusual one as Beijing has neither ratified nor signed the treaty establishing the court.

Several diplomats said that China was bargaining with the United States over Taiwan's status in the World Trade Organization, one of the few international bodies that admit both Beijing and Taipei.

However, China's UN ambassador, Wang Guangya, denied this was the case and said the resolution was sending "a very bad signal at this time," especially to Iraq. He said the US abuse of Iraqi prisoners raised the need for "strict observance of international law." The resolution, he said, was a signal that "whatever you are doing, you are being protected by the Security Council."

The Bush administration contends that the tribunal, based in The Hague, could be used for politically motivated lawsuits against far-flung American soldiers. Supporters say the court's statutes exclude countries with a proper judicial system, like the United States, from prosecution.