silverguide.site –

Ben Roberts-Smith has been charged with war crimes. Good for Australia, in a world where the greatest war criminals go scot-free, (if that phrase is still acceptable). Vladimir Putin is the worst – invading an unthreatening Ukraine and killing hundreds of thousands of their, and his own, people. But he’s followed by Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth, our foul mouthed and thuggish allies who glory in the mass murder of Iranians and Lebanese, egged on by Benjamin Netanyahu. For these people, Nuremberg may as well not have happened. In their new world order, where might is always right, there are no rules of command responsibility.

This does not of course exculpate the murderous mullahs of Iran, who have been killing their own people for many years. Earlier this year their revolutionary guards unleashed a wave of terror, killing many thousands of peaceful political protesters and subjecting others to torture. Trump urged these good people to rise up and overthrow their government, which was a reckless and indeed imbecile invitation as everyone knew that they had no guns. Now, many of them are being hung for being “moharab”, ie enemies of God. Trump no longer cares about them: he did not make it a condition of the ceasefire agreement that Iran should suspend the death penalty.

International felons cannot be prosecuted because their countries are not parties to the international criminal court (ICC). In the US last week, over 100 distinguished professors and practitioners of international law signed a declaration that the attacks on Iran intended to kill civilians and to destroy the infrastructure that sustained them were war crimes, and this warning may have helped to stay his hand. But Trump has nothing to fear from the law in America. In one of its worst ever decisions, the supreme court ruled that Trump is immune from prosecution for criminal acts he commits as president. He is untouchable, not only for the next three years, but forever.

There is another problem. I have just published a book, World of War Crimes, to explain that the existing laws of war have been written by victor nations and their obedient lawyers and diplomats who have devised them to allow “wriggle room” for crimes committed by their own forces. Attacks on civilians – by bombing their homes and apartments, by destroying schools and universities, hospitals and medical centres – may be all defended if the “military advantage” outweighs the collateral damage. This is a matter of opinion, and the opinion is that of the aggressor. The IDF argues that it can destroy and can kill dozens of innocent people in a refugee camp in order to kill one Hamas fighter. Moral philosophers and war crimes judges might disagree with this defence. But without war crimes judges to try such cases, there are, in reality, no war crimes.

Last week, Hegseth, who seems to see himself as Mars, the American god of war, announced that the US army will henceforth give no quarter. Giving no quarter (ie killing those who surrender) is the oldest and most basic war crime of all and is, effectively, what Roberts-Smith has been accused of (and consistently denied). Could Australian soldiers and airmen fight alongside American forces that ignore such a fundamental rule? Its navy (we know) kills sailors who cling to the wreckage of boats it destroys, which is another basic war crime.

There is little that decent countries with US alliances can do about this dreadful situation. Like Anthony Albanese, Keir Starmer has tried to keep his head down and declines to reply to Trump’s childish and incorrect taunts of cowardice, hoping that King Charles may pacify this crazed (but royalist) giant. Starmer is walking a tight rope and earning some electoral respect for doing so.

The US is stuck for three years with a president who seems both deluded and deranged. Its tech giants, (and Rupert Murdoch), celebrated his election (Bill Gates was a commendable absentee). Trump lacks a respected main opponent (other than George Clooney). Hollywood has gone mostly quiet, failing to put the movie Nuremberg up for an Oscar, although Russell Crowe surely deserved at least a nomination. There seems to be a general desire to appease a president who threatens to commit war crimes.

In any event, it is to be hoped that the war will be over by the time Roberts-Smith stands trial. It is important to remember that although he was condemned by a judge on “the balance of probabilities” in a libel trial, his criminal prosecution must prove its case “beyond a reasonable doubt” – an entirely different and higher standard. Already, and deplorably, some political leaders – notably Pauline Hanson and Tony Abbott – are proclaiming their support, although they are ignorant of the evidence that will be called for and against him. They may think they will sway an eventual jury, though of course, their support may have the opposite effect. Irrespective of the verdict, the very fact that there has been a prosecution (and it has been reported throughout the world) demonstrates that in this country at least the legacy of Nuremberg is not dead.

• Geoffrey Robertson AO, KC is author of World of War Crimes – Eyeless in Gaza and Beyond (Penguin Random House)