US Lifts Ban on Military Aid
By Matthew Vella
Malta Today
October 8, 2006

MALTA - The White House has lifted a three-year-old ban on aid for military training to Malta, put in place because it had refused to exempt US soldiers from prosecution by the International Criminal Court.

A mixture of diplomacy and concern for its diminishing influence would appear to be behind America’s decision to lift the ban. George W. Bush’s memorandum comes just days after recommending to the Senate to ratify an extradition treaty with Malta, signed back in May.

A spokesperson for the US embassy said President Bush signed the waiver “out of recognition of the need to balance the United States Government’s strong concerns with the ICC, and our important relationships with countries with which we share fundamental interests, including combating global terrorism.”

He also said the US embassy was working with the AFM to identify training priorities for which the US could provide assistance.

Malta was banned from receiving US military aid in 2003 after refusing to sign an “Article 98” agreement, which is bilateral agreement binding Malta not to hand over US soldiers to the ICC, which prosecutes war criminals, among other crimes.

The US embassy confirmed there was no agreement signed, nor were the two countries in the process of negotiating such an agreement.

As an EU member state, Malta aligned itself with the EU in publicly refusing to conclude a bilateral agreement with the US. The Americans claimed Malta felt “pressured not to sign” the agreement fearing it might endanger its EU candidacy, according to a 2004 joint report by the defence and state departments.

Since then Malta reportedly lost a combined total of over USD2.5 million (Lm800,000). Now it will get USD45,000 in international military education and training (IMET) funds under the 2007 budget request, but a further USD425,000 for non-proliferation exercises under the NADR programme is still believed to be withheld. The budget request for 2007 included advances on improved cargo inspection, increasing container screening at the Freeport, and undercover investigations training.

But the decision to lift the ban is also a recognition that America cannot always get what it wants: international military funding and maintaining a strong influence in foreign armies is far more important.

American NGO Citizens for Global Solutions said the US administration was “cutting off its nose to spite its face: it was prioritising its ill-conceived campaign over its own most vehemently stated foreign policy objective, namely winning the “war on terror”… Congress and the President have therefore taken a first step in the right direction, namely recognizing that strong arming tactics only serve to alienate U.S. friends and allies,” the group said earlier this week.

US senators from both sides have also expressed their disagreement with the funding cuts. Both John McCain and Hillary Clinton told a senate committee to reverse the decision to cancel military education and training programmes because it sent “the wrong signal” on fighting terrorism.

US concerns on Malta

America considers Malta to play a critical role in the Mediterranean, but mainly because one-third of the world’s maritime traffic passes through its ports.

Its main concern is the fact that Iran’s national shipping line, IRISL, made the Freeport its Mediterranean hub in 2004. According to the 2006 budgetary justification report, the “greatest concern to the United States is the potential movement of weapons of mass destruction and missile-systems-related items.”

That’s why the US gave Malta the VACIS container scanner, and the mysterious PISCES identification system, an immigration database located at all ports of entry.

In return, Malta is also negotiating with the US on a Proliferation Security Initiative which would allow US officials to board Malta-flagged ships suspected of transporting WMDs.

The Bush administration nullified the US signature to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in 2002, claiming the ICC may initiate politically-motivated prosecutions against US nationals.

Since then it has approached countries to sign bilateral agreements to exclude US citizens and military personnel from being handed over to the jurisdiction of the ICC. These agreements, which in some cases are reciprocal, do not include an obligation by the US to subject those persons to investigation or prosecution.

The US has also restricted cooperation with the ICC and makes any involvement in peacekeeping mission conditional on impunity for all US personnel. The American Servicemen Protection Act grants the President permission to use “any means necessary” to free US citizens and allies from ICC custody, prompting the nickname “The Hague Invasion Act”.

+ READ ON THE MALTA TODAY WEBSITE