Former President, and some would say war criminal George W. Bush cancelled an appearance at a Swiss human rights gala because he feared being arrested.  So now Bush joins Henry Kissinger in the ranks of Americans who don't feel that they can safely travel to or even through certain countries, not for fear of assassination or kidnapping, but for fear of arrest and trial.

To me, this raises a host of interesting questions.  My gut reaction, which may not be popular in these parts, is that I want American political leaders to be held accountable to the American justice system and ultimately to the American people.  The first job of an American government official, after all, is to serve Americans.  If the needs of Americans are at odds with, say, the desires or even the laws of the Swiss, we want our officials to prioritize our needs first.  Right?

Of course, that would be an exceedingly rare event.  People like me, and most of you, don't believe that Bush was operating in our best interests, even if he thought he was.  As Bush left the White House, there was serious talk about investigations and prosecutions.  But President Obama decided not to go that route.  I disagree with him, but do I want the Swiss or even the International Criminal Court to take up the slack?  Bush is a twice (well, one and a half) elected president, after all.  He was re-elected after torture, renditions and all manner of civil rights abuses came to light.  Did the electorate provide a mandate for his criminality?  Because sometimes it seems like America didn't have much of a problem with the guy until he tried to privatize social security.

I don't mean to be flip.  I believe in international laws and standards.  I also don't believe that America deserves special privileges in the world.  Saddam Hussein committed some of his worst crimes while he was a U.S. client.  He was hanged on Youtube.  Manuel Noriega committed some of his worst crimes while a U.S. client.  He's in a Florida prison forever.  We don't often respect sovereigns when they offend our interests.  Maybe we shouldn't expect similar immunity for our own leaders when they head out into the wider world.

But I do worry about what will happen when somebody in Switzerland or wherever wants to prosecute somebody that I like.  It's easy to be flip with Bush.  I think he was our worst president.  I think he was a criminal and that if the U.S. won't prosecute, some one should.  But what if it were Bill Clinton?  Lest you think this is the kind of slippery slope argument that Genghis exposes as sophistry in "Blowing Smoke," the American left actually accused Clinton of committing war crimes on at least two occasions: for supporting the economic sanctions against Iraq that had so impoverished its people and for pursuing a strategy of high altitude bombing in Serbia that kept our military safer while at the same time causing civilian casualties. I disagreed with both policies at the time, but if he were arrested for him, I think most Americans would be rightly outraged.

I also wonder if the world justice system will be fair here.  If you arrest Bush and try him for war crimes since 9/11, you also have to arrest his enablers on the world scene.  Tony Blair, for example.  Certainly the entire House of Saud.  If we're going to clear out the global police blotter, let's get the whole thing.

I suppose, in the end, that if Bush found himself arrested on some overseas trip I wouldn't be too up in arms over it.  But it's a real example of Obama's mistake.  We should have dealt with this ourselves and since we decided not to, we can't be surprised if others around the world decide to step in.  But if a high government official from either party is arrested and tried overseas, it's really an indictment of our whole society.  There's no way around that.

So far as Bush is concerned, this couldn't have happened to a more deserving fellow.