To Prosecute or Not to Prosecute: Civil War Mediation and International Criminal Justice

Abstract

The International Criminal Court (icc) came into force in July 2002 with the potential to drastically alter both the war fighting and peacemaking behavior of states. Theiccis designed to try and subsequently punish those found guilty of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Supporters of theicchave argued that its establishment will erode the norm of impunity that state and military leaders have historically enjoyed. Yet, another logic suggests that the initiation of aniccinvestigation or the issuance of an arrest warrant for individuals embroiled in an ongoing dispute may make matters worse. Such individuals may see little reason to stop fighting and reach a settlement if conflict resolution results in their detention in The Hague. Indeed, suspected war criminals and their patrons may wish to escalate their violence in order to avoid showing any sign of weakness or possibility of capitulation lest their enemies press the fight or their rivals seek to undermine their authority. In this article, we explore the potential impact of theiccon the likelihood of peace by examining the impact of actions by theicc– the initiation of investigations into conflict situations and the issuance of arrest warrants for those suspected of committing violations of international law – on the likelihood of mediation. Our findings suggest that whileiccarrest warrants can encourage mediation, the initiation of investigations by theicccan actually undermine the occurrence of mediation.