2 - American Public Opinion on International Courts and Tribunals

Summary

Although the United States has historically played a seminal role in establishing international courts, tribunals, and a multitude of other quasi-judicial and implementation control bodies, it is also true that the U.S. government's support for, and participation in, these bodies has ebbed – perhaps reaching a low point at the beginning of the twenty-first century. Other chapters in this book address the attitudes of the U.S. government toward the various international courts and tribunals. A rarely explored question is whether the U.S. government's stance reflects a simultaneous decline in support among the American public. In particular, one could ask:

• Do Americans support having international bodies adjudicate compliance with treaties? Are they willing to subject the United States to their judgments?

• How do Americans react to the report of the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Commission (February 2006) that found that the Guantanamo detention camps are inconsistent with international standards? Do they think the United States is obligated to change its practices according to the UN's findings and recommendations?

• Do Americans think the United States should participate in the International Criminal Court (ICC), even if, as the Bush administration has argued, it might be used against U.S. soldiers?

• Do Americans think an international court should have the right to investigate possible cases of torture? Or is this a purely domestic matter? Whom do they view as responsible for torture: those who carried out the torture or those who gave the orders?