Publication Date
2006
Abstract
When Mexico became a state party to the International Criminal Court, it put the United States in the position of choosing between honoring its relationship with Mexico or staying true to its strong objections to the ICC. The downside of the first option is that the United States would be backing down from its anti-ICC stance; the downside of the latter is that the United States would not only disrespect Mexico in pushing it to sign a bilateral immunity agreement, but, since Mexico would likely refuse to enter into such an agreement, the United States would also be put in the awkward position of having to cut off foreign aid to Mexico in areas where cooperation is both frequent and productive, such as trade, combating drug trafficking, and fighting terrorism. Given the importance of its cooperative relationship with Mexico and the argument that most U.S. objections to the ICC can be countered with safeguards in the Court's framework, the United States should choose to rely on the safeguards built into the ICC, not pursue a bilateral immunity agreement with Mexico, and continue to provide military and other foreign aid to Mexico.
Recommended Citation
Harkavy, Rachel
(2006)
"Picking Our Battles: A Strategy for the United States in the Wake of Mexico's Becoming a State Party to the International Criminal Court,"
Georgia Law Review: Vol. 40:
No.
3, Article 10.
Available at:
https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/glr/vol40/iss3/10
