MS says he's not surprised by the prosecutor's move: I think that the prosecutor has been extremely patient and he's been trying to use the force of the moral value of the ICC to get Sudan to cooperate. Instead of cooperating they've taken the main indictee and make him Human Rights Minister. They've done everything possible to spite the court and thereby spite the international community. (Is this smart procedural strategy to implicate an entire government, essentially?) I think the smart strategy was to be incremental, which is what he's done for two years. but at this point, what other option is there? the government of Sudan has been exploiting the Security Council's inability to act. (Do you place any credence in the Sudanese President's claim that this could ruin the peace process?) The peace process has made extremely little progress and it's been mostly because of the government of Sudan. The argument that they shouldn't do anything by allowing the peace process to go forward puts peace before justice and we've learned that you can't have peace without justice. (Will this be an issue for the next President of the US?) This may be the test case for the ICC and the US's relationship with the ICC. The Presidential candidates have been lukewarm on the ICC. I do think this case this will have ripple effects in the way the US relates to the ICC.