Sabtu, 13 Oktober 2012

FOREIGN POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES IN OBAMA’S ERA TOWARD THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN


PART I

PREFACE

1.1              Problem Identification

Foreign policy is the combination and the reflection of a country’s domestic condition which fluenced by the regional or international condition. The end of The Cold War have been arisen The United States as “The Sole Super Power”. Beside that, the 9-11 (11th of September) 2001 had bring a great effect on the revolution turn on foreign policy of The United States, especially on the revolutional turn on the essence of The United States role as ‘the police agent’ for the countries in the Middle East and the Northern Africa and for the countries all over the world.
In the Middle East, foreign policy of The United States related to it’s global politics. More than 3 decade, when the uni Soviet still became a greatest rival for the United States, the strategic interest of that country in the Middle East is only for the preventif action to dame up the Uni Soviet domination. But after the fall out of the Uni Soviet, the interest of the United States is for defending it’s hegemony in the Middle East and keep the existence of it’s global strategies which need more backing from the countries in the middle East.[1]
About the foreign policy of the United States to the Islamic Republic of Iran, the historical fact shown that the relations between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran was begin by the very close diplomatic relation. The official relation between them was begin in the end of 1800 when King Nasser al Din Shah sent his ambassador to Washington. Since that time until the World War II, the relations between them is really fine.
The relations between them become worse when Shah Reza Muhammad Pahlevi regime fallen out and then the Iranian Revolution born which led by Imam Khomeini. And then The Islamic Republic of Iran exist as a sovereign state. After all that time, Iran became a state which gaze directly to the United State.
The strained situation of Iran-the United State relation was reach a crest when George W. Bush elected to be the President of the United State. Bush expelled Iran from international community and called Iran as “devil axis” with North Korea and Irak (when Irak led by Saddam Hussein).
            When Barrack Obama elected as a new President of the United States (take the place of George W. Bush), he gave a new direction to the foreign policy of the United States. He gave a good signal for changing the foreign policy of the United States in the Middle East and Northern Africa.
            But in reality, the foreign policy in Obama’s era is difficult to realize. The harmony in Iran-the United States relation is difficult to reach again because Iran becoming insistent for improving it’s nuclear program. If the United State still believe that Iranian nuclear program is brought to the non-peacefull aim, it will be impossible for them to make a good relation as before.
Based on the argument that I said before, I’m trying to identify the foreign policy of the United States to the islamic Republic of Iran after Barrack Obama elected as the United States President. Of course, I also identify how was the condition of their relations and the policies which have done by both countries.

1.2              Research Question

Why the foreign policy of the United States to the Islamic Republic of Iran never change in Obama’s era ?

1.3              The Framework Theories

In this working paper, I use this theory and concept as my base to identify the problem. They are :

1.3.1        The Concept of National Interest

The foreign policy of a country adopted based on the national interest of it’s country. The national interest mostly used as a tool to analize something to know the aim of the foreign policy of a country.
More than 3 decade, when the uni Soviet still became a greatest rival for the United States, the strategic interest of that country in the Middle East is only for the preventif action to dame up the Uni Soviet domination. But after the fall out of the Uni Soviet, the interest of the United States is for defending it’s hegemony in the Middle East and keep the existence of it’s global strategies which need more backing from the countries in the middle East.[2]

1.3.2        The Theory of Foreign Policy

Foreign policy is a combination from the authoritative policy of a country to the external circumstances, which fluenced and formed by many internal factors and many external factors which interacted each other. Foreign policy of a country drew an action of it’s country for any special condition, time and place which fluenced by domestic condition or international condition.
In this working papaer, I try to analyze the construction of foreign policy of the United States in Obama’s era to the Islamic world citizen, especially to the Islamic Republic of Iran, in the shadow of interest power and pressure group such as AIPAC (American-Israel Public Affairs Committee) who mostly gave a simplistic view to the dynamics of politic in Islamic states.


PART II

RESEARCH

2.1              The Dynamics Relations Between The United States of America and The Republic of Iran

The official relation between the United States and Iran was begin in the end of 1800 when King Nasser al Din Shah sent his ambassador to Washington. In 1911, the United States sent Morgan Shuster, an American commerce banker, and Arthur Chester Millspaugh, an economic advisor, to Iran for improving the financial condition of Iranian Kingdom. Suster and Millspaugh was succesfully do their job. The economic condition of Iran has grown rapidly, and then Iran begin to make a trade relations with the Western.
Iran positioning the United States as “the third power” in Iran excertion on struggle for freedom from the domination of Russia and England. The United States with the Shah Reza Muhammad Reza Pahlevi regime have brought Iran to the brighter eonomic and financial condition, which caused by the huge funding from the United States and the pro-Israel policy of Shah Reza regime.[3]
The fallen out of Shah Reza regime become a bad momentum of Iran and the United States relations. The Iranian think that the United States funding for improving the economic condition of Iran, which also brought the capitalism and materialism, as satanic temptation. The Iranian abhorence to the United States can not be dame up because of the civilization.
The close relations between them at the beginning was totally change since the reclination of 50 diplomat from the United States in the United States Embassy Building in Teheran on November 1979 by the militant group, pro-Khomeini university students, and the Iranian armed group.[4] After that case, the United States takes the policy for isolating Iran from international circumstances. On World Jewish Conference on 30th of April 1995, President Bill Clinton said that he decided to cut all acquintance of the United States on trade and investment with Iran.
On 1979, the relations between Iran and the United States after Iranian revolution become worse. This is because of the born of Iranian Revolution which led by Imam Khomeini and the declaration of independence of The Islamic Republic of Iran.
The strained situation of Iran-the United State relations was reach a crest when George W. Bush elected to be the President of the United State. Bush expelled Iran from international circumstances and called Iran as “devil axis” with North Korea and Irak (when Irak led by Saddam Hussein). After all that time, Iran became a state which gaze directly to the United States.
When Barrack Obama elected to be the President of the United States, the relations between Iran and the United States still unclear. Personally, Obama really wanted to improve the relations between Iran and the United States. But in reality, the foreign policy towards Iran in Obama’s era is difficult to realize. The harmony in Iran-the United States relation is difficult to reach again because Iran becoming insistent for improving it’s nuclear program. If the United State still believe that Iranian nuclear program is brought to the non-peacefull aim, it will be impossible for them to make a good relation as before. So, the development of Iran and the United States relations depends on Obama’s foreign policy as the President of The United States.

2.2              The Influence of Obama As The Designated Leader (The President) of The United States on Framework of The United States Foreign Policy Towards Iran

When Barrack Obama elected as a new President of the United States (take the place of George W. Bush), he gave a new direction to the foreign policy of the United States. He tried to take a risk and opened a peacefull communication with another states who think that the United States is their enemy.
President Obama gave a good signal for changing the foreign policy of the United States in the Middle East and Northern Africa countries. It’s not only about the problems between Iran and the United States, but also about the effect into the countries in the Middle East and the Northern Africa region, such as Irak, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Iran and Afghanistan.
But in reality, the foreign policy in Obama’s era is difficult to realize. The harmony in Iran-the United States relation is difficult to reach again because Iran becoming insistent for improving it’s nuclear program. If the United State still believe that Iranian nuclear program is brought to the non-peacefull aim, it will be impossible for them to make a good relation as before. The success and the failure of the dialogue between Iran and the United States is really influential for the situation in the Middle East and the Northern Africa region. The effect of ‘the domino theory’ is really aplicable here in terms of the relations between Iran and the United States.[5]
The reconciliation efforts on relations between Iran and the United States by President Obama was doing by the horrifying steps. One of that is admitted the United States involvement on the coup d’etat in 1953 to fall out the Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh government. “Di tengah Perang Dingin, AS telah memainkan peran dalam menggulingkan pemerintah Iran yang dipilih secara demokratis”. That was the statement from President Obama in his speech to the Moslem world in Cairo. That was the first time in the history of the president of the United States in revealing the involvement of the United States on that coup d’etat.[6]
Ayatullah Khomeini as Iranian leader gave a strong reaction to Obama’s speech in Cairo. Khomeini said that even Obama speech for hundred times, it will be useless if no changes made in the foreign policy of the United States. Khomeini think that Obama’s word into Islam world will be useless if there is no changes made on Washington’s policy itself.[7]
Analyzing the foreign policy of the United States in Obama’s era is also can be observed by the political view of his party. The Democrat have no willing to use the military power on it’s foreign policy. The concern of the domestic politic and foreign politics of the United States is on Human Rights issues, democracy issues, and the environment issues. The Democrat is concerned on the economic development of the United States, social assurance, consistency of progressive aplliance of tax, better health services, more concern about the equality in education, and willingness to use the power of the state to reach the social justice.[8]
            The important thing to know is that the foreign policy of the United States will have no drastic change from George W. Bush (Republican) to Barrack Obama (The Democrat). This is because of the national interest of the United States. For example : even in his speech, President Obama said that he promise to improve the relations towards Islamic states in the world, but in reality the United States still have a really big problem with Iran because the United States rejected Iran’s nuclear program.
The most influential reason of the United States to reject Iran’s nuclear program is about the political reason. As I said before, the United States still defending it’s national interest. The United States dont want any new power of the world defeated him, moreover Islamic state such as Iran.  So, even Obama promises that he would change the United States foreign policy, there will be no changes made significantly because he also want to defend the united States national interest.


PART III

CONCLUSION

The United States still defending it’s national interest, especially for it’s relations towards Iran. That aim is for keeping it’s hegemony in the world. The United States dont want it’s hegemony is beaten by the new power in the world such as Islamic states like Iran. Because of that, the foreign policy of the United States towards the Islamic Republic of Iran which applied by President Obama have no differences with the foreign policy in Bush era.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bhakti, Ikrar Nusa. Obama dan Politik Luar Negeri AS. Artikel Koran, Jakarta: Seputar Indonesia, 2009.
Gerges, Fawaz A. Amerika dan Islam Politik : Benturan Peradaban atau Benturan Kepentingan? Jakarta: Alva Bet, 2002.
http://www.adangdaradjatun.com. http://www.adangdaradjatun.com/berita/terbaru/333-obama-akui-keterlibatan-asdalam- kudeta-di-iran-1953 (diakses April 4, 2012).
Kegley, Charles W. International Terrorism Characteristic, Causes, Control. New York: Fact St. Martins Press, Inc., 1990.
Khamanei: Politik Luar Negeri AS Harus Diubah. http://www.beritanusantara.com/-internasional/80/1544.html (diakses April 5, 2012).
Rahman, Musthafa Abd. “Efek Teori Domino dalam Isu Dialog Iran-AS.” Kompas, 6 April 2009.
Susilo, Taufik Adi. Mengenal Amerika Serikat : Rahasia di Balik Negeri Adidaya. Yogyakarta: Garasi, 2009.



[1] Taufik Adi Susilo, Mengenal Amerika Serikat : Rahasia di Balik Negeri Adidaya, Yogyakarta, Garasi, 2009, hlm. 59.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Fawaz A. Gerges, Amerika dan Islam Politik: Benturan Peradaban atau Benturan Kepentingan?, terj., Jakarta, AlvaBet, 2002, hlm. 53.
[4] Charles W. Kegley, International Terrorism Characteristic, Causes, Control, New York, Fact St. Martins Press, Inc., 1990. hlm. 173.
[5] Musthafa Abd. Rahman, “Efek Teori Domino dalam Isu Dialog Iran-AS”, Kompas, Edisi 6 April 2009 diunduh dari www.kompas.com pada 2 April 2012 pukul 12.15
[7] Baca “Khamanei: Politik Luar Negeri AS Harus Diubah” di website http://www.beritanusantara.com/-internasional/80/1544.html, diunduh pada 5 April 2012 pukul 13.27
[8] Ikrar Nusa Bhakti, “Obama dan Politik Luar Negeri AS”, di Harian Seputar Indonesia, Edisi 19 Januari 2009.

CROUCHING "THE HIDDEN DRAGON"

ASEAN-China Free Trade Area (ACFTA) is the new era for ASEAN-China relations in trade and economy. ACFTA is the continuance of ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) which has signed in 1992. In the beginning, ACFTA was made for improving the relations between ASEAN and China in trade and economy. But as the time goes by, ACFTA becoming a ‘ghost’ for ASEAN country. The relations becoming unequal now and ASEAN country have to set the strategy to strengthening it’s trade and economy for kicking “The Hidden Dragon”.
ACFTA effectively applied in 1 January 2010. The aim of this assignment in the beginning is :
1.        Strengthening and improving the relations between ASEAN and China in trade, economy, and investment.
2.        Liberating and improving capital trade and service trade, and also creating a transparent system for facilitating the investment mechanism.
3.        Exploring the new model of cooperation and fostering the right policies for keeping the economic relations between ASEAN and China.
4.        Facilitating the effective economic integration between the new ASEAN member (Kamboja, Laos, Myanmar, Vietnam / CLMV) and bridging the economic development gap between it’s members.
But, the implementation of ACFTA’s aim above is not as smooth as the imagination of ASEAN country. Moreover, ACFTA is now becoming a ‘ghost’ for ASEAN country, including Indonesia. ACFTA will be stopped if the implementation of ACFTA endangered ASEAN economy in general, and Indonesian economy in particular. ACFTA may give China more chance to spread the domination in ASEAN countries. In Indonesia, after ACFTA effectively applied, national industries being ‘hit’ by Chinese product. We can find Chinese product easily in some traditional market or in every supermarket. The supply of Chinese product is much more than national product because of their price which cheaper than ours. The quality of Chinese product is also quite good enough. This is the reasons why Indonesian people in common prefer to choose Chinese product than our national product. This domination of China becoming a ‘ghost’ for ASEAN country and Indonesia of course.
The domination of Chinese product in Indonesia especially is affected by China’s economic policy. The price of Chinese product in Indonesia is cheaper than it’s price in China’s domestic market. This strategy is called dumping policy. On economy, dumping is traditionally defined as selling at a lower price in one national market than in another. Dumping is officially banned in international trade. Beside the dumping policy, there is some controversial of Chine’s economic and industry policy. For example, the exploitation of national worker, and restriction the rights of making a union. China’s authoritarian regime can do anything to force the increasing of China’s quantities production, even do the violance. China’s mass production becoming a threat for another country, especially ASEAN and Indonesia.
Indonesian government realize that China’s dumping policy has a negative effect for Indonesia. This is quite unfair for Indonesia, because China dominate our national market by the illegal way (doing the dumping policy). Indonesia have to set the strategy for keeping the relations to China in trade and economy. Indonesia will take three steps for crouching “The Hidden Dragon” as known as China on ACFTA. This strategy is for ensuring that ACFTA will bring a good impact for our national economy. The strategy is :
1.        ACFTA must give a priority to the balance trade principal. If the unequal condition happened, there will be a renegotiation.
2.        Preventing excession in our national industries that affected by ACFTA.
3.        Improving the capacity building of our national industry.
China-Indonesia economic and trade relations becoming unequal, especially in frame of ACFTA. As the agreement reached, there will be a renegotiation if the condition becoming unequal. One of the member that lossed by the agreement can make a protest. This is the aim of Indonesia for preventing Indonesia from suffer. And then, Indonesia have to strengthen our national capacity building for improving the quality and the quantity of our national product. Next is renegotiation step. Renegotiation is quite difficult to reach the agreement, but there is a possible chance to do it. We can do it if China break the balancing trade principal. That’s one of the target for crouching “The Hidden Dragon”. China may becoming so accomodative because of that. There is some crucial point that Indonesian government have to pay attention : China-Indonesia quantities of export and import, stardard of the product, the price market with no dumping, and Indonesian product labeling. And then, our taxes policy have to optimalized, so we can improve our competitiveness and reducing China’s domination in our national trade and economy. And of course the government have to develop a good infrastructure for supporting the effectivity of our national industry.

REVIEW FILM : THE RECKONING, THE BATTLE FOR THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT


The Reckoning adalah sebuah film yang menceritakan perjalanan International Criminal Court (ICC) sebagai sebuah lembaga peradilan internasional dalam memperjuangkan keadilan untuk menyelesaikan berbagai kasus pelanggaran HAM berat, terutama kasus genosida yang terjadi di beberapa negara di dunia, seperti di Sudan Selatan (Darfur), Kongo, Kolombia, dan Uganda. Kalimat “the battle for The International Criminal Court dalam judul film ini merupakan sebuah bentuk penggambaran yang nyata mengenai pergumulan ICC dengan berbagai macam rintangan yang harus mereka hadapi dalam penyelesaian kasus genosida yang terjadi.
A.                Peran ICC Sebagai Lembaga Peradilan Internasional
“Genosida adalah sebuah kejahatan kemanusiaan dan genosida adalah sebuah tindak kriminalitas yang tidak bisa dimaafkan (genocide is a crime against humanity and genocide is the unforgivable crimes)”.[1]  Itulah kalimat yang menurut saya patut digarisbawahi. Dan mungkin saja kalimat tersebut juga yang kemudian memotivasi Luis Moreno Ocampo, Christine Chung, Fatou Bensouda, Ekkehard Withoff, Adrian Fulford, dan penegak hukum lainnya di ICC untuk terus memperjuangkan keadilan bagi para korban genosida di negara-negara tersebut.
ICC adalah sebuah lembaga peradilan internasional yang didirikan berdasarkan Statuta Roma pada tahun 1998, namun ICC baru menjalankan fungsinya secara efektif pada tahun 2002 setelah 60 negara meratifikasi Statuta Roma sekaligus menjadi negara anggota. ICC dibentuk untuk melakukan peradilan terhadap kasus-kasus pelanggaran berat HAM dalam lingkup internasional yang di antaranya berupa kejahatan kemanusiaan (crime against humanity) dan kejahatan perang (war crime). Salah satu latar belakang pembentukan ICC adalah karena memudarnya kepercayaan para korban kasus-kasus pelanggaran berat HAM terhadap kinerja pemerintah negaranya dalam menangani kasus-kasus tersebut, sehingga dibentuknya ICC seakan menjadi oase bagi para korban dalam keputusasaan mencari penyelesaian kasus yang mereka hadapi.
Meskipun usia lembaga internasional ini terbilang ‘muda’, namun kinerja ICC cukup signifikan. Telah banyak kasus kejahatan internasional yang ditangani oleh ICC, bahkan yang sulit menemukan penyelesaian sekalipun. Hal ini tentu menjadi sebuah kabar yang menggembirakan. Namun sayangnya, ICC melalui para penegak hukumnya hanya memiliki kewenangan untuk menyelidiki kasus pelanggaran berat HAM yang terjadi di negara-negara yang meratifikasi Statuta Roma pada tahun 1998 dan hanya dapat diperkarakan apabila negara yang bersangkutan menginginkan kasus tersebut untuk dibawa ke ranah hukum.[2] Hal inilah yang kemudian menjadi masalah besar bagi ICC dalam usaha penyelesaian kasus genosida yang terjadi di Darfur, Sudan Selatan. ICC seakan diuji eksistensinya dalam penyelesaian kasus pelanggaran berat HAM di lingkup internasional.
B.                ICC dan Uganda
Uganda memiliki sebuah kelompok militansi bernama The Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). LRA telah melakukan kejahatan kemanusiaan berupa genosida, selain itu LRA juga terbukti melakukan kejahatan perang dengan melibatkan penduduk sipil (non-kombatan), yaitu anak-anak dan wanita. LRA melakukan penculikan, pembunuhan, dan pembudakan seksual terhadap anak-anak dan wanita. Dalam kasus genosida ini, yang dianggap paling bertanggung jawab adalah Joseph Kony sebagai pimpinan LRA dan Vincent Otti.
Telah banyak usaha yang dilakukan oleh ICC dan pemerintahan Uganda sendiri untuk membicarakan mengenai perdamaian di Uganda, Namun, kebanyakan usaha tersebut menemui kebuntuan. Dalam tubuh ICC sendiri terjadi pertentangan dalam hal penyelesaian kasus ini. Pengambilan keputusan secara konsensus membuat ICC sulit mengambil langkah untuk mengintervensi Uganda. Hal ini juga diperparah dengan kurangnya dukungan internasional dalam usaha penyelesaian kasus ini, seperti sikap China, Rusia, dan Amerika Serikat yang menentang keras intervensi ICC di Uganda. Inilah yang kemudian membuat Luis Moreno Ocampo sebagai Jaksa di ICC harus memutar otak untuk mencari penyelesaian terbaik untuk kasus ini.
Dalam usaha penyelesaian kasus ini, muncul pertentangan dari LRA. LRA menganggap bahwa ICC menghalangi proses damai yang terjadi di Uganda karena tuntutan memperkarakan kasus genosida tersebut. LRA kemudian mencari siasat dengan meminta maaf kepada masyarakat Uganda dan berusaha meyakinkan masyarakat Uganda untuk tidak mempermasalahkan lagi kasus tersebut dan menolak untuk memperkarakan kasus tersebut. Hal ini tentu bertentangan dengan apa yang diinginkan oleh ICC.
C.                ICC dan Amerika Serikat
Meskipun tidak mendapatkan dukungan dari Amerika Serikat, Christine Chung sebagai Jaksa Penuntut Senior di ICC tetap yakin dan optimis bahwa ICC bisa menjalankan tugasnya dengan baik dan tidak akan pernah ada satu negara pun yang bisa menghalangi ICC dalam menjalankan tugasnya sebagai lembaga peradilan internasional. Terlihat di sini bagaimana ICC berusaha mematahkan stigma bahwa lembaga internasional yang ada tidak akan bisa berjalan tanpa dukungan dari negara adikuasa, Amerika Serikat.
D.                ICC dan Kongo
Konflik dan kasus genosida yang terjadi di Kongo merupakan kasus yang sangat sulit untuk diintervensi oleh ICC dalam hal usaha penyelesaiannya, sebab dalam kasus ini banyak tokoh yang berperan dan memiliki situasi yang lebih rumit dibandingkan dengan kasus yang terjadi di Uganda. Awal mula konflik yang kemudian berujung pada genosida ini adalah saat Thomas Lubanga Dylo membentuk sebuah pasukan milisi di daerah Itiri. Kejahatan yang telah dilakukan oleh kelompok milisi ini adalah dengan melibatkan anak-anak sebagai tentara, penculikan dan pembunuhan anak-anak dan wanita, serta pembudakan seksual. David Alicana, seorang aktivis HAM mengatakan bahwa kasus yang terjadi di Kongo merupakan sebuah kejahatan yang sangat serius, oleh karena itu ICC harus menangkap Thomas Lubanga Dylo sebagai pihak yang paling bertanggung jawab atas semua ini.
Keinginan David Alicana pun kemudian diamini oleh ICC. Pada tahun 2006, ICC berhasil menahan Thomas Lubangan Dylo atas tuduhan pemberlakuan wajib militer secara paksa dan penggunaan tentara anak. Ini merupakan sebuah keberhasilan yang dicapai oleh ICC sekaligus membuktikan eksistensinya sebagai sebuah lembaga peradilan internasional.
E.                ICC dan Kolombia
Kasus kejahatan internasional yang terjadi di Kolombia tidak kalah rumitnya. Menurut Ocampo, kasus kejahatan internasional yang terjadi di Kolombia cukup rumit karena melibatkan orang-orang penting di negara tersebut. Inilah yang kemudian membuat ICC cukup kesulitan untuk mengusut kasus yang terjadi di sana. Ada dua kelompok yang melakukan kejahatan internasional di Kolombia, yaitu Facs Guirellas dan Paramiliteria. Kelompok Paramiliteria memiliki hubungan erat dengan sekitar 30 orang senator Kolombia, sehingga memudahkan mereka untuk melakukan tindak kriminalitas. Masyarakat Kolombia dibantu oleh beberapa NGO mendesak ICC untuk melakukan investigasi dan mencari penyelesaian kasus tersebut. Namun di sisi lain, pemerintah Kolombia tidak ingin aib negaranya diusut oleh ICC. Sehingga terjadi kontradiksi antara pemerintah Kolombia dengan masyarakat Kolombia sendiri.
F.                 ICC dan Darfur, Sudan Selatan
Kasus Darfur terbilang cukup unik dan sedikit rumit. ICC menemui kesulitan dalam mengungkap kasus genosida yang terjadi di Darfur, sebab Sudan bukan merupakan negara anggota ICC (bukan negara yang meratifikasi Statuta Roma). Satu-satunya cara yang dapat ditempuh untuk menyelesaikan kasus genosida tersebut adalah dengan memperkarakannya melalui Dewan Keamanan PBB. ICC pun akhirnya melewati Sidang Dewan Keamanan PBB untuk membawa kasus ini ke ranah hukum. ICC terus berusaha untuk mengumpulkan bukti dan data yang dibutuhkan untuk pengajuan perkara. Mereka yang dianggap paling bertanggung jawab atas kasus ini adalah Ahmad Harun, Ali Kushayb, dan kelompok Janjaweed.
Konflik yang terjadi di Darfur merupakan konflik yang terjadi antara etnis Arab yang menamakan diri mereka kaum Janjaweed dengan etnis Afrika yang sebagian besar tinggal di Darfur. Cerita mengenai konflik ini lebih lengkap bisa ditemukan dalam film “Darfur Now”. Terjadi pertentangan antara Ocampo dengan Duta Besar Sudan untuk PBB. Duta Besar Sudan untuk PBB mengatakan bahwa Ocampo hanya menyampaikan omong kosong belaka. Ocampo tidak tinggal diam, ia terus memperjuangkan penyelesaian kasus ini. Dalam kesempatan Sidang Dewan Keamanan PBB, Ocampo menyampaikan dengan sangat tegas bahwa diam bukanlah suatu sikap yang bijak dan juga merupakan suatu tindakan kriminal. Diam justru akan membuat para korban semakin sengsara dan membuat para pelaku semakin merasa bebas.
G.               Kesimpulan
Film ini menceritakan bagaimana usaha keras ICC untuk menegakkan keadilan di berbagai negara atas terjadinya kasus pelanggaran HAM berat. Masih merupakan sebuah pekerjaan rumah yang besar bagi ICC untuk menemukan jalan keluar terbaik bagi beberapa kasus tersebut yang masih menemui kebuntuan dalam penyelesaiannya dan kemudian menangkap mereka yang dianggap paling bertanggung jawab atas terjadinya kasus-kasus tersebut. Peran pemerintah negara-negara yang bersangkutan juga sangat penting dalam usaha penyelesaian kasus-kasus tersebut. Dukungan internasional juga sangat diperlukan agar tercipta iklim keamanan yang lebih kondusif dan perdamaian dunia bisa diwujudkan dengan tidak adanya lagi kejahatan internasional yang terjadi.


[1] Kutipan dari film “The Reckoning”
[2] Adaptasi pernyataan Christine Chung, Jaksa Penuntut Senior ICC