JayAtl
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2010
- Messages
- 8,812
- Reaction score
- -14
take it up with ICC , if the world body believes it to be so- arrest him. next excuse
China rolls out red carpet for Sudan president
- Thread starter JayAtl
- Start date
take it up with ICC , if the world body believes it to be so- arrest him. next excuse
Chinese-Dragon
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2010
- Messages
- 33,932
- Reaction score
- 52
- Country
- Location
Stubbornness is not righteous in the world's eye. you may convince yourself with excuses- try to deflect to some sino pak nuclear dealrofl
but everyone knows that you avoid answering this simple question. If proven till guilty is the standard of arresting someone ( which by itself is absurd in terms of anyones law)- then why did China ask for indicted persons to be handed over by other countries?
not being a part of ICC does not stop you from handing over a man, not doing business with a man who is responsible for 400,000 deaths!
You seem to have trouble, with the simple concept of "innocent until proven guilty".
It has not yet been proven that he is responsible for any of that.And your governments are tacitly supporting us, by not doing anything about it. Just like with the Sino-Pakistan nuclear deal. So thanks for that.
below_freezing
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2010
- Messages
- 8,253
- Reaction score
- 0
We don't recognize the ICC.
JayAtl
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2010
- Messages
- 8,812
- Reaction score
- -14
You seem to have trouble, with the simple concept of "innocent until proven guilty".
And your governments are tacitly supporting us, by not doing anything about it. Just like with the Sino-Pakistan nuclear deal. So thanks for that.
LOL - you govt asked other countries ( extradition)to hand over people who were innocent but they were not yet proven guilty! why the duplicity?
JayAtl
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2010
- Messages
- 8,812
- Reaction score
- -14
ask whomever- next excuse..
Chinese-Dragon
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2010
- Messages
- 33,932
- Reaction score
- 52
- Country
- Location
LOL, you are funny. For the same reason that people are arrested before they are given a trial.
You're confusing "being found guilty", and "being served with an arrest warrant".
China does not recognize the ICC, so any arrest warrant they issue is worthless here.
He has not been found guilty of any crime, by any authority that we recognize. Or even by those authorities that we don't recognize (ICC). No one has found him guilty in any court of law.
siegecrossbow
PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2010
- Messages
- 7,414
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
Neither does Russia nor does the United States.
JayAtl
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2010
- Messages
- 8,812
- Reaction score
- -14
if not recognizing was the standard then why does china ask others countries, threatens them ( noble peace prize anyone?) if their not recognized arrest warrants on individuals or their disliked individuals visits other countries? It you vs the world on this issue. the man is responsible of killing 400,000
that's like saying the Japaneses were not convicted of mass killings of the chinese... so they are innocent of all the horrible things your school books say of them .
Hitler was not convicted - do you believe the Holocaust was a lie?
Brotherhood
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 31, 2010
- Messages
- 2,439
- Reaction score
- 0
Hmm, lets see who is talking while being one of the "biggest investor" in Sudan, doing "big business" with the so-called "criminal" President "Omar al Bashi" just like China, take a good look at the true face of people from a well known "hypocritical" country. They have already get it all planned out to their best benefits long before the referendum in Sudan and India has been the biggest supporter of President Omar al Bashir way before China.
Indias Predicament
Indias relationship with Sudan dates back to ancient times. Over the years India has developed close ties with Khartoum; however until very recently India had minimal contact with the South. The upcoming referendum has left India in a dilemma. It has substantial investments in Sudans energy sector, mainly in the South. ONGC Videsh Ltd (OVL) has invested around $2.5 million in acquiring exploration and production assets in Sudans oil sector. OVLs blocks in Sudan give it approximately 2.4 million tons of crude oil annually.
However for India and OVL in particular the fate of these investments in Southern Sudan is unclear. The first challenge would be that of access; given that most of the oil infrastructure is in the control of the North, much would depend on the terms and conditions worked out between the two sides after the referendum. Another challenge is the possibility of the new Southern Sudan government changing the policies guiding the energy sector and in the worst case scenario, cancelling the contracts.
As India mulls over measures to deal with the challenges of the impending referendum, its strategy to build simultaneous relations with the Government of Southern Sudan (GoSS) since the 2005 CPA may buffer the adverse impact. Over the years India has maintained close political ties with the NCP government. The visit of Indian President Kalam to Khartoum in 2003 sealed the relationship. Subsequently there has been exchange of high level delegations from both sides. However after the political transformation in Sudan in 2005 the Indian government has slowly warmed up to the GoSS. In 2005, the Indian Minister of State for External affairs E. Ahmed led an eighteen member business delegation to Juba. In 2007 India opened a consulate in Juba. Later, in continuation of its traditional policy of supporting human resource development in Africa, India provided training to a group of South Sudanese diplomats at the Foreign Service Training Institute in New Delhi. However, lack of infrastructure, rising food insecurity and health concerns provide India Inc. with opportunity to do brisk business with the new government in Juba.
At the same time Indias generic policy in Africa to build economic ties beyond oil may help in restructuring its relations with North Sudan in the post referendum period. At present the cumulative Indian investment and loans to Sudan are estimated at over US$ 3 billion. Apart from energy India has also been involved in the Sugar industry, thermal power sector and revamping the railways. It appears there over 50 Indian companies including Reliance, Kirloskars, Tatas, Mohan Exports, Angelique International Ltd., Mahindras and L&T are doing business in Sudan. Thus India should utilize this leverage towards improving commercial ties with the North.
However India should be cautious of the great power politics in Sudan. If the South secedes, India should be prepared to accept that its relationship with Khartoum will change. The Bashir government has been constantly engaged by the United States and other European countries in the countdown to the referendum. They have used a carrot and stick policy to pressure the North to meet the referendum deadline. The American desire to contain the rise of China in Sudan has shaped their policy towards Sudan. Moreover there are chances that the US Africa Command might be located in the newly independent South. Hence once the South secedes India should be prepared to face competition from the oil majors and try to avoid repetition of developments in Iraq, where India lost out most of its investments with the emergence of a new dispensation. Moreover India should also accept the continued presence of China in the region. In recent years China has taken steps to safeguard its interests in Sudan by engaging the Southern Sudan government in a big way while at the same time continuing to maintain close relations with the North.
Given the strategic importance of Sudan, it will be in Indias interest to push for a fair and just referendum and influence both the North and the South to respect the outcome of the vote.
India should not be a bystander or simply disguise its interests in the slogan of non-interference
If the South votes against secession, India should push the regions leadership to uphold the outcome while at the same time urging the North to address the concerns of the South;
If the South votes to secede, India should immediately recognise the government and press the North to respect the outcome.
The South will urgently need infrastructure development should it secede; and will need all possible help towards strengthening its institutions, its capacities to govern, and meeting the development requisites. Indian companies will get an opportunity to invest.
The North needs to be assured of the security of livelihood without the oil wealth flowing from the South. Indian companies should continue their business interactions in the North.
Finally, India should support the decisions and measures suggested by the African Union in the post referendum period.
Referendum in Sudan: India
Indias Predicament
Indias relationship with Sudan dates back to ancient times. Over the years India has developed close ties with Khartoum; however until very recently India had minimal contact with the South. The upcoming referendum has left India in a dilemma. It has substantial investments in Sudans energy sector, mainly in the South. ONGC Videsh Ltd (OVL) has invested around $2.5 million in acquiring exploration and production assets in Sudans oil sector. OVLs blocks in Sudan give it approximately 2.4 million tons of crude oil annually.
However for India and OVL in particular the fate of these investments in Southern Sudan is unclear. The first challenge would be that of access; given that most of the oil infrastructure is in the control of the North, much would depend on the terms and conditions worked out between the two sides after the referendum. Another challenge is the possibility of the new Southern Sudan government changing the policies guiding the energy sector and in the worst case scenario, cancelling the contracts.
As India mulls over measures to deal with the challenges of the impending referendum, its strategy to build simultaneous relations with the Government of Southern Sudan (GoSS) since the 2005 CPA may buffer the adverse impact. Over the years India has maintained close political ties with the NCP government. The visit of Indian President Kalam to Khartoum in 2003 sealed the relationship. Subsequently there has been exchange of high level delegations from both sides. However after the political transformation in Sudan in 2005 the Indian government has slowly warmed up to the GoSS. In 2005, the Indian Minister of State for External affairs E. Ahmed led an eighteen member business delegation to Juba. In 2007 India opened a consulate in Juba. Later, in continuation of its traditional policy of supporting human resource development in Africa, India provided training to a group of South Sudanese diplomats at the Foreign Service Training Institute in New Delhi. However, lack of infrastructure, rising food insecurity and health concerns provide India Inc. with opportunity to do brisk business with the new government in Juba.
At the same time Indias generic policy in Africa to build economic ties beyond oil may help in restructuring its relations with North Sudan in the post referendum period. At present the cumulative Indian investment and loans to Sudan are estimated at over US$ 3 billion. Apart from energy India has also been involved in the Sugar industry, thermal power sector and revamping the railways. It appears there over 50 Indian companies including Reliance, Kirloskars, Tatas, Mohan Exports, Angelique International Ltd., Mahindras and L&T are doing business in Sudan. Thus India should utilize this leverage towards improving commercial ties with the North.
However India should be cautious of the great power politics in Sudan. If the South secedes, India should be prepared to accept that its relationship with Khartoum will change. The Bashir government has been constantly engaged by the United States and other European countries in the countdown to the referendum. They have used a carrot and stick policy to pressure the North to meet the referendum deadline. The American desire to contain the rise of China in Sudan has shaped their policy towards Sudan. Moreover there are chances that the US Africa Command might be located in the newly independent South. Hence once the South secedes India should be prepared to face competition from the oil majors and try to avoid repetition of developments in Iraq, where India lost out most of its investments with the emergence of a new dispensation. Moreover India should also accept the continued presence of China in the region. In recent years China has taken steps to safeguard its interests in Sudan by engaging the Southern Sudan government in a big way while at the same time continuing to maintain close relations with the North.
Given the strategic importance of Sudan, it will be in Indias interest to push for a fair and just referendum and influence both the North and the South to respect the outcome of the vote.
India should not be a bystander or simply disguise its interests in the slogan of non-interference
If the South votes against secession, India should push the regions leadership to uphold the outcome while at the same time urging the North to address the concerns of the South;
If the South votes to secede, India should immediately recognise the government and press the North to respect the outcome.
The South will urgently need infrastructure development should it secede; and will need all possible help towards strengthening its institutions, its capacities to govern, and meeting the development requisites. Indian companies will get an opportunity to invest.
The North needs to be assured of the security of livelihood without the oil wealth flowing from the South. Indian companies should continue their business interactions in the North.
Finally, India should support the decisions and measures suggested by the African Union in the post referendum period.
Referendum in Sudan: India
Chinese-Dragon
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2010
- Messages
- 33,932
- Reaction score
- 52
- Country
- Location
The Holocaust was a "historical fact", as recognized by the academic community, with tonnes and tonnes of paperwork, and hard evidence to prove it. Same with the Japanese part of WW2.
And both the Nazis and the Imperial Japanese army, WERE convicted of war crimes.
So you're just talking BS, when you say they weren't convicted.
Thomas
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,688
- Reaction score
- 0
10 million? try 45 million..........
Great Chinese Famine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
That aside though China is simply using him to get what they want. Sudans resources! Just like everywhere else in the world they need all the resources they can get thier hands on. That is what is more important to them more then anything else.
Chinese-Dragon
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2010
- Messages
- 33,932
- Reaction score
- 52
- Country
- Location
That's right, they starved to death. Terrible tragedy.
Not quite as bad as the racist genocide of the Native Americans though (100 million dead), for being "inhuman savages". I.e. The event upon which your entire nation was founded.
As for resources, don't tell me that America was allied to Saudi Arabia and Mubarak's Egpyt, because you shared their beliefs.
JayAtl
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2010
- Messages
- 8,812
- Reaction score
- -14
The Holocaust was a "historical fact", as recognized by the academic community, with tonnes and tonnes of paperwork, and hard evidence to prove it. Same with the Japanese part of WW2.
And both the Nazis and the Imperial Japanese army, WERE convicted of war crimes.
So you're just talking BS, when you say they weren't convicted.
there is tons and tons of documented evidence proving bashir genocide- Hague court has it all- documentaries have been done on it and shown it . Hitler himself was not convicted because he never stood trail -- per your logic and you can't back away from it he is " innocent" - nice. japanese convicted of genocide by whom- who stood trial ?
the man killed 400,000 !
Chinese-Dragon
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2010
- Messages
- 33,932
- Reaction score
- 52
- Country
- Location
It's a "historical fact", which means to all extents and purposes it has been proven by the evidence.
I'm not sure why you're begging for us to arrest him anyway, it's not as if that is going to change anything, is it?
Sort of like the lame resistance to the Sino-Pakistani nuclear deal, bordering on tacit support.
Even if you could prove that, India kills more than ten times that number of children (5.6 million) every single year, spending the money on their Swiss Bank accounts, instead of food for their people.
Thomas
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,688
- Reaction score
- 0
China, the ICC and Libya: A New Level of Hypocrisy? | Justice in Conflict
"not everything about Chinese-ICC relations has been doom-and-gloom. China participated actively in the negotiations leading up to the adoption of the ICC’s Rome Statute and has been an engaged partner in the ICC’s Assembly of States Parties since 2002. Not only has it been engaged with the Court, but it has, on occasion, voiced impressive political support for the Court. While this may come as a surprise to many, China has even suggested that its accession to member-state status is a realistic possibility."
Similar threads
