So now we can even further contrast Dean & Clark's grasp of International Affairs.
Dean- Iraq is "probably the best place to try Saddam". Dean is willing "to be flexible about that (trying him in Iraq) because I don't think the security interest of the United States are involved".
Clark- has a four point plan which starts by saying that it is best for Saddam to be tried in Iraq so that the people there can witness the PROCESS of Justice and have it unfold before them. This is, in fact, important to the stability of the entire region by promoting the Rule of Law and Democracy. He also said this will help in defeating Terrorism. So where and how Saddam is tried IS important to the security interest of the US.
Clark's four points:
**Location- In Iraq, where majority of offenses occurred. Make it Public & Transparent
**Procedure- Internationally recognized standards & procedures crafted by Arab League, UN and European Union but conducted by Iraqis.
**Participants- Parallel hearings in other countries with their findings being admitted into Iraqi court.
**Punishment- Death Penalty HAS to be there although ultimately up to Iraqi's to decide.
-The above is from my handwritten notes of the the NH Press Conference Clark gave on Cspan after returning from the Hague.
.................................................................................................................................................................
We can also contrast Dean & Clark's comments on trying Osama:
Dean didn't comprehend the importance of trying Osama in the Hague and thought it only important that he be brought to justice.
Clark knew that it matters because of the importance of promoting the Rule of Law, International Justice & Multilateralism.
MATTHEWS: General, do you think Osama bin Laden, if we catch him, when we
catch him, should be tried here at the U.S. or in the Hague, the international court?
CLARK: I would like to see him tried in the Hague, and I tell you why. I think it's
very important for U.S. legitimacy and for building other support in the war on terror for
trying them in the Hague, under international law with an international group of
justices, bringing witnesses from other nations. Remember, 80 other nations lost citizens
in that strike on the World Trade Center. It was a crime against humanity, and he needs
to be tried in international court.
MATTHEWS: Well, 3,000 Americans were killed here. Do you believe he should be
held exempt from capital punishment, because if you send him to Hague he will be. They
don't have capital punishment at the Hague.
CLARK: I think that's a separate issue. I think that's a separate issues.
MATTHEWS: No, it's a key issue, because the sentencing limitation, they do not
execute people at the Hague.
CLARK: I think that you can adequately punish Osama bin Laden, and you've got to
look beyond simple retribution against an individual. You have to look at what's in the
long-term security interest in the security in America and you have to look at how we
handle the war on terror from here on out.
MATTHEWS: But doesn’t life in Holland beat life in a cave?
CLARK: Not in a Dutch prison. Chris, they're under water, they're damp, they're
cold, they're really miserable.
...............................................................................................................................................................................
MATTHEWS: Who should try Osama bin Laden if we catch him? We or the World Court?
DEAN: I don't think it makes a lot of difference. I'm happy...
MATTHEWS: But who would you like to, if you were president of the United States, would
you insist on us trying him, since he was involved in blowing up the World Trade Center, or
would you let The Hague do it?
DEAN: You know, the truth is it doesn'y make a lot of difference to me as long as he is
brought to justice. I think that's the critical part of that.
MATTHEWS: How about Saddam Hussein? Should we try him in criminal and execute him...
DEAN: Again, we are allowing the Bosnian war criminals to be tried at The International
Court in The Hague. That suits me fine. As long as they're brought to justice and tried, and
so far we haven't had to have that discussion because the president has not been able to
find either one of them.
Here's a link to a previous discussion...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=904414