Everyone wants peace. It’s just that they want it on their own terms. Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi wants peace in Libya, so long as it means he remains in power. At a later date, his terms may change: peace in return for exile in a country that will keep him out of the clutches of the International Criminal Court. The rebels and NATO countries want peace too, but only so long as Gaddafi leaves and the rebels form a new government. Peace on your own terms really means victory. Indeed, that’s how victory could be defined.
Peace, On Our Own Terms
Published by Stephen Gowans
Stephen Gowans is the author of The Killer's Henchman: Capitalism and the Covid-19 Disaster (2022); Israel, A Beachhead in the Middle East: From European Colony to US Power Projection Platform (2019); Patriots, Traitors and Empires: The Story of Korea's Struggle for Freedom (2018); and Washington's Long War on Syria (2017). For notification of updates, send an e-mail to stephen.roy.gowans@gmail.com with "subscribe" in the subject line. View all posts by Stephen Gowans
Published
What's Left 
The ICC officials should be aware of this behavour of the US and other powerful entities, and ascvt accordingly,..why even listen to the US and other agents which have committed war crimes?
Your question assumes the ICC exits to impartially investigate, try and judge war crimes and violations of humanitarian law. If your assumption were correct, one could indeed ask why Gaddafi would be sent to the ICC, and not NATO leaders, or the Benghazi rebels, who, according to The New York Times’ C. J. Chivers (“Inferior arms hobble rebels in Libya war”, April 20) have committed the war crime of “indiscriminate fire — the very behavior rebels and civilians have decried in the Qaddafi force.” But since the ICC is hardly impartial, and since through their refusal to recognize the court’s jurisdiction and their UN Security vetoes, powerful countries, such as the United States, are able to exempt themselves and their satellites from the court’s oversight, the ICC exists as nothing more than an instrument of powerful states to deal with the leaders of non-satellites. It is for this reason that Gaddafi could be sent to the ICC. I gather, however, that your question was entirely rhetorical.
ICC>? why would he be sent to the ICC>? what has he done?
after all the US.NATO have invaded many countries and slaughted millions and theyve never set foot in the ICC