Justice as a Means of Control and Oppression

December, 2003

We all knew it would be coming: the show trials against Saddam and other members of the former government of Iraq. The occupiers and their Iraqi representatives desperately need a propaganda boost to present themselves as legitimate. What better way than building upon the successful demonization of Saddam, mix up some information, a lot of half-truths and lies and write the history books to be fed to both the people in the aggressor countries in preparation of always the next war and the Iraqi people being forced to grow up and live under occupation and colonization.

What i am trying to communicate here is that political justice against enemy leaders has certain functions, mainly focussing on the areas of propaganda and mind control. Presented under the theme of ending the impunity of political leaders who committed most serious crimes, political justice is really a way to present as just the crimes being committed by the dominant or victorious powers.

'Special' and 'international courts' are mainly another means in a comprehensive strategy of control and oppression. Or does anyone really believe we will see Colin Powell or Joshka Fischer or Kofi Annan (or anyone else like them) before these courts for the war crimes and mass extermination they are responsible for? Or will it always be those the Great Powers pick for prosecution?

The justice we are facing is rooted in and inseparable from the hierarchical world order dominated by the Democratic Societies and their 'international community' using multiple standards of assessment and treatment within a racist and oppressive framework to always condemn the others while justifying themselves.

No Justice under International Law

The concept behind International Law and Prosecution is based on assumptions that there are universally applicable laws and that a supranational prosecution and enforcement structure is desirable. Both these assumptions are revealing a deeply rooted totalitarian mindset.

Peoples were never asked or involved with making any of the international laws which are neither a reflection of any common moral imperatives communicated and agreed upon nor are they based upon a divine entity. Moreover, it should be clear to everyone seriously thinking about this, that there is not even a theoretical not to mention practical way that the peoples of the world could ever communicate as equals and even less agree upon a common moral code or laws to follow.

• Human is always relative to other human and cannot create any absolute binding for humankind.
• Principals and values can only be obligatory insofar as people agree or voluntarily accept to obey and quickly turn into oppression and violence against minority positions.
• Peoples ways of life, cultures and histories are not only different, but often conflicting or even mutually exclusive.
• Mega-structures, covering many millions or even billions of people, feature a high degree of centralization and steep hierarchies at the top.

But even if we assume there would be laws most people agree upon, they would be of not much use without prosecution and enforcement. And it is absolutely clear that any supranational judicial and executive power structure would always be controlled by the dominating military-political and scientific-economic forces.

When we hear statements like the one by Pope Paul that International law must ensure that the law of the more powerful does not prevail, , appealing for the replacement of the material force of arms with moral force of law. we may remind ourselves that the 'moral force of law' -- control yourself according to the rules imposed upon you -- is indeed very much based upon 'the material force of arms' -- violent enforcement of these rules in case people don't obey voluntarily --. We may hope with the Pope that international law, 'the law of the more powerful does not prevail' because in its core international law is just another means used by the Dominant Powers to advance their own interests.

Laws work Differently for those with Power

Although the powerful mostly make the laws, sometimes these laws become an obstacle to themselves in a certain case or under changing circumstances. In these situations they will either re-interpret or simply violate their own laws, while continuing to demand that all others comply. And more often than not we see systematic factors like racist attitudes and the availability of funds for defense and bribery influence the use of laws.

We are living through a transitional phase, where the international political order, largely defined during WW II in anticipation of the Cold War and superpower polarization, is being accommodated according to the requirements and realities of:

• multi and transnational monetary and economic communication and integration
• political and military control and enforcement
• information control and propaganda

This is why the application of treaties and other sources of international law appears more and more openly arbitrary and contradictory. Particularly the UN Charter's principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members , which was never meant to be more than appeasement and essentially an empty phrase, is now broadly and openly rejected and redefined.

What we see today is open intervention, aggression and re-colonization by the DTS. Never respecting other peoples and always trying to tell them what to do and force their schemes upon them. Without respect there is no basis for communication, justice and therefor no peace. Whatever may happen, there won't ever be justice under international law.

Historic example of Political Justice: Nuremberg

The decline of the British and Ottoman Empires and the intensification of wordwide competition between the Great Powers for imperialist or colonial control over territory, peoples and resources led to the two 'World Wars'. World War II was fought about hegemony and not about principles or moral superiority. The vicorious Allies were not satisfied with German capitulation. They began a psychological operation to divert attention from the causes of war.

The Nuremberg trial (International Military Tribunal) against 21 Nazi officials and high ranking military personnel was the most prominent of the show trials of the West. The victorious Allies of WW II wanted to present the war as one between 'good' and 'evil' and themselves as 'good' and winning a 'just' war. The accused were the actors in a media and propaganda spectacle which had nothing to do with justice and everything with propaganda, control, and subjugation.

"Just followed orders" and "Didn't know anything"

Nuremberg was designed to implement a scheme, which opened an easy way for Germans to avoid being confronted with their actions during the Nazi rule. Only very few were put through trials or imprisoned, while all the other Germans who had 'just followed orders' and 'didn't know anything' were cleared and somehow turned into 'victims' of the 'evil' Nazi regime themselves being 'liberated' from Fascism by the 'good' Americans or Russians respectively.

Indeed, many people who had actively participated in imprisonment, torture, oppression and genocide found themselves in comfortable positions and collaborating with the new rulers like they had done under the old.

Germany Marching Again

For Germans as a society to embrace a 'unique historical guilt' because of what we have done to the Jews is a way to absolve ourselves of guilt concerning what we do now.

Prevented was the development of a genuine culture of resistance and civil disobedience, an obligation and culture of not following orders which are unethical, and a fundamental rejection of war as a means for Germans under whatever conditions and circumstance but self-defence against invading troops. Nothing really has fundamentally changed and Germany is back attacking and occupying other countries these days expanding its influence all over the places.

We may remember that the destruction and bombing of Yugoslavia was promoted by Germany in clear violation of it's own constitution (written under occupation) and international law forbidding war of aggression. Germany has prominent roles in the occupation of Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan with a significant and expanding military profile in Africa and parts of Eastern Europe. Germany is marching again.

Racism and De-Humanization

A main difference between Germany and Iraq is racism. The so called World Wars were wars among the colonial-imperial powers for hegemony and after a short time Germany was again welcome and even encouraged to become powerful within the Western alliance under US leadership. Whatever was done to the Germans in terms of humiliation and suffering they were not collectively de-humanized.

Iraq on the other side was made a pariah state and singled out for aggression and mass extermination without being able to defend itself effectively. It was isolated, betrayed by the 'international community' and being bombed back into occupation and recolonized with no respect for their history, culture or dignity.

We are Accomplices in Exterminating Iraqi People

The more than two million Iraqi people exterminated by the 'international community' were not even worth any apologies. Hardly anyone is talking about the horrific crime we committed and the numbers are deflated as we go along. The mass extermination of Iraqi people was tolerated, accepted and supported by the vast majority of people in the democratic societies including the human rights, humanitarian help and peace people.

It is us who should face justice at the hands of the Iraqi people for being complice in the crime of mass extermination of Iraqi people.