Latest news with #Nuremberg-style
Yahoo
11-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
We need to defeat Putin before putting him in the dock
In Ukraine, rivers of spilled innocent blood cry from the earth for justice. Who can provide it? The Council of Europe plans to create a new court specifically to try Russians for 'crimes of aggression' for the invasion of Ukraine. Britain is backing the new court, with Sir Keir Starmer's long-time friend Philippe Sands taking the lead in lobbying the UK legal establishment. The moral argument for a Nuremberg-style tribunal to punish those guilty of war crimes is a solid one. When today's murderers, rapists and torturers go unpunished, the potential war criminals of tomorrow are encouraged. The creation of the special court is expected to be unveiled in Kyiv on May 9th – Europe Day, but also the day on which Russia celebrates its victory over Germany in 1945. The symbolism of creating an institution designed to bring Russian war criminals to trial on the very anniversary of the final demise of Nazism is powerful. Except there is one major flaw in Sands' vision. None of the actual accused, from Vladimir Putin down to the soldiers of 76th Guards Air Assault Division accused of massacring civilians in the Kyiv suburb of Bucha in March 2022, will actually be present. Unlike the Nuremberg trials, after World War Two, next to none of the alleged war criminals are in reach of the court's justice. Russia, for obvious reasons, has no intention of ever recognising the court, and nor will America – which has also declined to sign up to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague. Moreover, the new court will not reportedly try Putin, Russian prime minister Mikhail Mishustin or the Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov in absentia. So what, precisely, will the proposed new court actually do that the ICC does not? The difference, in Sands' view, is that the new tribunal should be empowered to examine Russian leaders' culpability in the 'crime of aggression' – a modern version of the principle of 'crimes against peace' pioneered at Nuremberg. A great and noble idea, doubtless. But setting up a court is not the same thing as bringing justice. The fundamental premise of a fair trial is that the defendants have a chance to make their case before an impartial judge or jury who will weigh the facts without fear or favour. Even at Nuremberg three of the nineteen senior Nazi defendants were acquitted. If there is no realistic chance of either the accused arguing their own defence, nor of an acquittal, is there any purpose to the proposed tribunal other than political virtue signalling? The ICC has already issued an arrest warrant against Putin and one of his deputies for the unlawful transfer of Ukrainian children to Russia. The ICC has brought war criminals in the past from Serbia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mali, Libya and Uganda to justice. There is no reason that Russians should not join the list – if the court manages to get its hands on them. And this is the key point: the war is far from over. Talk of a tribunal is astonishingly premature at this stage. Ukraine faces a bitter choice between peace and justice. The country's territory has been attacked and dismembered, with little prospect of restitution. The thousands of Ukrainians who have suffered from Putin's invasion are understandably desperate to punish their aggressor in every way possible. But setting up a special new court, however noble its intentions, is a fake solution that will offer neither justice nor closure; these things will only come after the war ends. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
11-04-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
We need to defeat Putin before putting him in the dock
In Ukraine, rivers of spilled innocent blood cry from the earth for justice. Who can provide it? The Council of Europe plans to create a new court specifically to try Russians for 'crimes of aggression' for the invasion of Ukraine. Britain is backing the new court, with Sir Keir Starmer's long-time friend Philippe Sands taking the lead in lobbying the UK legal establishment. The moral argument for a Nuremberg-style tribunal to punish those guilty of war crimes is a solid one. When today's murderers, rapists and torturers go unpunished, the potential war criminals of tomorrow are encouraged. The creation of the special court is expected to be unveiled in Kyiv on May 9th – Europe Day, but also the day on which Russia celebrates its victory over Germany in 1945. The symbolism of creating an institution designed to bring Russian war criminals to trial on the very anniversary of the final demise of Nazism is powerful. Except there is one major flaw in Sands' vision. None of the actual accused, from Vladimir Putin down to the soldiers of 76th Guards Air Assault Division accused of massacring civilians in the Kyiv suburb of Bucha in March 2022, will actually be present. Unlike the Nuremberg trials, after World War Two, next to none of the alleged war criminals are in reach of the court's justice. Russia, for obvious reasons, has no intention of ever recognising the court, and nor will America – which has also declined to sign up to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague. Moreover, the new court will not reportedly try Putin, Russian prime minister Mikhail Mishustin or the Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov in absentia. So what, precisely, will the proposed new court actually do that the ICC does not? The difference, in Sands' view, is that the new tribunal should be empowered to examine Russian leaders' culpability in the 'crime of aggression' – a modern version of the principle of 'crimes against peace' pioneered at Nuremberg. A great and noble idea, doubtless. But setting up a court is not the same thing as bringing justice. The fundamental premise of a fair trial is that the defendants have a chance to make their case before an impartial judge or jury who will weigh the facts without fear or favour. Even at Nuremberg three of the nineteen senior Nazi defendants were acquitted. If there is no realistic chance of either the accused arguing their own defence, nor of an acquittal, is there any purpose to the proposed tribunal other than political virtue signalling? The ICC has already issued an arrest warrant against Putin and one of his deputies for the unlawful transfer of Ukrainian children to Russia. The ICC has brought war criminals in the past from Serbia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mali, Libya and Uganda to justice. There is no reason that Russians should not join the list – if the court manages to get its hands on them. And this is the key point: the war is far from over. Talk of a tribunal is astonishingly premature at this stage. Ukraine faces a bitter choice between peace and justice. The country's territory has been attacked and dismembered, with little prospect of restitution. The thousands of Ukrainians who have suffered from Putin's invasion are understandably desperate to punish their aggressor in every way possible. But setting up a special new court, however noble its intentions, is a fake solution that will offer neither justice nor closure; these things will only come after the war ends.
Telegraph
10-04-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Britain backs Nuremberg-style trials of Russia despite Trump opposition
Britain is backing plans for a Nuremberg-style trial of Vladimir Putin in the face of opposition from Donald Trump. The UK will support proposals at the Council of Europe next month calling for Russians to be prosecuted for 'crimes of aggression' during the invasion of Ukraine. The idea would involve setting up a military tribunal, modelled on the Nazi trials after the Second World War, to prosecute Russian leaders and generals for war crimes. Some lawyers, including Sir Keir Starmer's long-time friend Philippe Sands, have suggested the ad hoc court should be established specifically to deal with crimes of aggression, which are defined by the United Nations as 'invasion or attack by the armed forces of a state on the territory of another state, or any military occupation'. Some Western countries, including the UK, have said that Russians should be tried on those grounds for the political decision to invade, not only for war crimes committed on Ukrainian soil once the war began. The International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague cannot examine the 'crime of aggression', and is not recognised by either Russia or the US. The plan for a new court to examine crimes of aggression was first suggested in 2022. It was backed by the Ukrainian government and Joe Biden's administration, which sent funding and American prosecutors to help set it up. However, Donald Trump withdrew all US involvement in the plan after his inauguration in January, as part of his strategy to be more conciliatory towards Moscow. The president has refused to refer to the war in Ukraine as an 'invasion' by Russia, and hopes to act as a peace broker between Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian president. America confirmed last month it had withdrawn from the International Center for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression (ICPA), the body overseeing the tribunal plans, and suspended all American funding. The decision means the tribunal will no longer have the backing of the G7 group of countries. Mr Trump refused to sign off a planned G7 statement calling Russia the 'aggressor' in the war in February, and has called Mr Zelensky a 'dictator'. Ukrainian diplomats have privately tried to keep the plans alive after the US withdrawal, and are now looking for more diplomatic backing. The Telegraph understands that the UK will support the latest version of the idea, which will be put forward by Ukraine in documentation to the Council of Europe, the international human rights body, next month. The Council previously established a 'core group' of senior legal experts from around 40 states who worked with the Ukrainian authorities and various European organisations on the tribunal idea. Next month's plan is likely to be supported by most European nations, who are more hawkish than Mr Trump on Russia and have pledged that 'no one from Russia's leadership is untouchable'. But the idea risks driving a wedge between Sir Keir and Mr Trump, after his attempt to act as a transatlantic 'bridge' between the president and the EU. Mr Trump has privately been accused by Ukraine's supporters in Europe of abandoning Mr Zelensky and weakening his negotiating position ahead of peace talks. A Whitehall source told The Telegraph: 'Ukraine has consistently called for accountability for Russia's decision to launch this illegal war and the UK has consistently supported that call.' 'There is clear international support for action to ensure Russia is held to account for its aggression in Ukraine. The US position is a matter for the US.' Britain's support for a Nuremberg-style tribunal comes after lobbying from Mr Sands, who met with the UK attorney general Lord Hermer to discuss it after the US election in November, according to retracted records seen by The Telegraph. Sources close to Lord Hermer said the virtual meeting had been scheduled for the attorney general, the government's top lawyer, to hear the case for supporting the court. The plans have also been supported publicly by Gordon Brown, the former Labour prime minister, and former Conservative ministers when in government.
Telegraph
21-02-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Starmer to defy Trump with new aid for Ukraine
Sir Keir Starmer is to announce a new package of support for Ukraine, despite Donald Trump piling pressure on Kyiv to back down and accept a peace deal with Russia. The Telegraph can reveal that the Prime Minister will use the third anniversary of Russia's invasion to unveil a 'triple whammy' of measures, including military aid and sanctions, on Monday. It is in stark contrast to the approach taken by Mr Trump, who has in recent days called Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian president, a 'dictator' and is pressing for a speedy end to the conflict. Amid a widening split between the US and Europe over the Ukraine war, the US president on Friday accused Sir Keir of doing 'nothing' to bring the conflict to a close. The US also indicated that it could leave an international effort to prosecute Russia for war crimes. The differences between London and Washington will be put under a spotlight when Sir Keir visits the White House for face-to-face talks with Mr Trump on Thursday. In an attempt to calm any tensions, The Telegraph understands that during the trip Sir Keir is expected to finally announce the date – most likely to be 2030 – by which 2.5 per cent of UK GDP will be spent on defence. He will also hand over an invitation from the King offering a state visit to the UK, making Mr Trump the first elected leader in modern history to receive the honour twice. But Sir Keir's new support package for Ukraine risks frustrating the White House. A senior government source defended the approach, saying: 'We have always said we want to put Ukraine in the strongest position, whether that's for going into talks or for the continuation of fighting. 'We still don't know which of those positions we're going to be in. It's right that we continue to support Ukraine in all the ways that we have long said we will.' In the past fortnight, European leaders have been left reeling after Mr Trump began peace talks with Russia without Ukraine at the table, and signalled that US security support for Europe would be scaled back. The US president's administration has refused to sign off a planned G7 statement, which calls calls Russia the 'aggressor' in the war with Ukraine, to mark the third anniversary of the conflict. Washington is similarly refusing to co-sponsor a United Nations statement that supports Ukraine's territorial integrity and demands Moscow withdraw its forces from the war-torn nation. The Telegraph can also reveal that the US has signalled it could leave an international effort to prosecute Russia for invading Ukraine. US envoys refused to label Russia an 'aggressor' at a meeting of a 'core group' of countries preparing a Nuremberg-style tribunal to try Vladimir Putin for his war crimes, according to Western officials. Next week, Emmanuel Macron, the French president, and then Sir Keir will travel to Washington in an attempt to convince Mr Trump to soften his approach. However, the gap between the UK and US positions on the conflict will be underscored on Monday. A package of measures involving three different government departments is being drawn up inside Whitehall to show UK support for Ukraine. The Ministry of Defence will announce new details of its military aid for Ukraine. One idea under discussion is extra weapons for Mr Zelensky's forces, but it has yet to be fully signed off. The Foreign Office will unveil a major set of sanctions against Russia, building on a drive that has seen 1,900 Russian people and entities sanctioned since the invasion of Ukraine. The Home Office will launch a crackdown on Russian 'dirty money', according to one government source. Oligarchs backing Putin could be targeted. Some in Whitehall have described the package of measures as a 'full triple whammy' designed to underline Britain's backing for Kyiv. Final details were still being drawn up on Friday evening. On Monday, John Healey, the Defence Secretary, will give interviews explaining the extra support. David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, is expected to address the Commons. The challenge awaiting Sir Keir in his first meeting with Mr Trump since he entered the White House became even more apparent on Friday. The US president said of Sir Keir and Mr Macron: 'They didn't do anything either [to end the war]. The war's going on, no meetings with Russia, no nothing. Macron is a friend of mine, and I've met with the Prime Minister, he's a very nice guy... [but] nobody's done anything.' Sir Keir is understood to be bringing forward the long-awaited announcement of when he will increase UK defence spending from 2.3 per cent of GDP to 2.5 per cent. The year had been due to be unveiled after a strategic defence review was completed and published in the spring, and possibly as late as June. Now, however, it is expected that Sir Keir will name the date during his visit to the US. Rishi Sunak, the former Tory prime minister, had promised to hit the target in 2030. The move would be likely to be sold to Mr Trump as further proof that Downing Street agrees with his demand for increased defence spending from European nations and is acting on it. However, the announcement could be followed by awkward questions, including why Sir Keir will not go higher. Mr Trump has floated a five per cent defence spending target for Nato nations, even though the US's own defence spending is under four per cent. No 10 is also likely to be pressed about how the spending increase would be paid for, given the tightness of the public finances.
Telegraph
21-02-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Trump to abandon Russia war crimes prosecution
The United States has signalled it could leave an international effort to prosecute Russia for invading Ukraine, The Telegraph can reveal. US envoys refused to label Russia as an 'aggressor' at a meeting of a 'Core Group' of countries preparing a Nuremberg-style tribunal to try Vladimir Putin for his war crimes, according to Western officials. Washington is similarly refusing to co-sponsor a United Nations statement that supports Ukraine's territorial integrity and demands Moscow to withdraw its forces from the war-torn nation. Mr Trump's administration has also refused to sign off on a planned G7 statement calling Russia the 'aggressor' in the war with Ukraine to mark the third anniversary of the conflict on Monday. The US president has blamed Ukraine for starting the war, branded Volodymyr Zelensky a 'dictator' and pushed for Russia to be invited back to the alliance of industrialised nations. European officials fear Mr Trump's flattery of Putin could lead to the Russian despot being let off the hook for his invasion as part of any peace settlement. This stance has put preparations for the final meeting of the 'Core Group' next month in doubt. The group is leading a 40-nation coalition to form a Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine, modelled on the response to Nazi war crimes after the Second World War. It would involve the US and other countries joining Ukraine to grant jurisdiction to a dedicated criminal tribunal to investigate both the perpetrators of the crime of aggression and those complicit in that crime. The crime of aggression cannot be prosecuted by the International Criminal Court in the Hague. 'Unless they acknowledge it's an aggression, they can't participate,' an official said of US opposition to the labelling of Russia as an aggressor. Losing Washington' s backing for the tribunal will be a major blow to the project's international reputation and standing. 'This is quite a drastic shift,' a European diplomat told The Telegraph. 'Rewriting history and pretending that Russia wasn't the one who started this war is something that we simply cannot and will not agree to.' The US has not yet officially withdrawn from the scheme and is expected to attend its next meeting next month in Strasbourg, France. A diplomatic note seen by The Telegraph revealed that European officials were 'shocked' at US claims at a series of international meetings that Russia should be invited back into the 'civilised world'. European capitals are now holding talks over a possible collapse of the special tribunal if the US does walk away as feared. The latest US position marks a significant shift in policy between Joe Biden and Mr Trump. The former president had branded Putin a 'war criminal' and signed off on a series of international statements which described Russia as the aggressor state. Washington is now pushing for the almost three-year war to be called the 'Ukraine conflict' in discussions with international allies. A State Department readout of the meeting between Marco Rubio, the US state secretary, and Sergei Lavrov, Russia's foreign minister, twice described the war as 'the conflict in Ukraine'.
