THE United States and Europe are heading for a clash over the new International Criminal Court after France tabled a draft United Nations resolution calling for the court to prosecute war crimes in Darfur.

The move will force the United States to make a painful choice next week between accepting the authority of a tribunal it opposes and using its veto to block the prosecution of war criminals it believes are responsible for “a genocide” in Sudan’s western province.

France’s neat diplomatic manoeuvre was played out late on Wednesday as the UN Security Council tried to deal with the continuing crisis in Sudan.

US efforts to win approval for a new UN peacekeeping force of 10,000 troops to monitor a ceasefire in southern Sudan bore fruit last night as the Security Council voted for the deployment.

The body may also back a strengthening of sanctions against Khartoum because of its actions in Darfur, but Washington remains isolated over the question of how to prosecute suspected war criminals, many of them members of the pro-government Janjawid militia responsible for murder, ethnic cleansing and mass rape.

A UN report in January recommended that the International Criminal Court, based in The Hague, be given responsibility for prosecuting those blamed for the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians in Darfur and the displacement of two million people. The US, which had opposed the creation of the court on the ground that it could be used to bring politically inspired prosecutions against US citizens, suggested that a tribunal to try Sudanese war crimes be established in Tanzania.

That proposal gained little support at the UN this week. Sensing an opportunity, Jean-Marc de la Sablière, the French envoy to the UN, tabled a counter-resolution that would refer all Darfur cases since July 1, 2002, to the International Criminal Court. “We had to act,” he said. “France has shouldered its responsibilities today.”

On paper, the French move looks likely to succeed. Nine votes are needed to pass a resolution in the 15-member Security Council and as many as 12 countries have signalled that they will support the French initiative. Britain supports the French resolution. “We have gone to great lengths to make sure that the text on the table is one most likely to be acceptable or at least not objectionable to any colleagues,” Sir Emyr Jones Parry, the British envoy, said.

Only a veto from one of the permanent members — the US, Russia or China — can scupper the resolution. Such a move would be deeply embarrassing and provoke widespread criticism that action against war criminals was being blocked.

Richard Dicker, director of Human Rights Watch, said that after describing Darfur as genocide, the US was blocking the credible threat of prosecution by the International Criminal Court, “which could immediately deter further violence in Darfur”.

A spokesman for the US mission at the UN summed up Washington’s dilemma. “Certainly the United States is very committed to punishing those who committed these awful crimes in Darfur and throughout Sudan,” he said. “But with respect to using the International Criminal Court, our views are well known and still unchanged.”

Explore World News

• World Agenda

• Iraq News

• US & Americas News

• Europe News

• Middle East News

• Afghanistan News

• Asia News

• Africa News

• Ireland News

Times Recommends

• It’s only Brits who don’t appreciate me, says Blair
• Party’s over for Greek graspers
• White House tightens security for Xmas marathon