I agree with the argument that the nexus between U.N.S.C. 1593 and membership in the Genocide Convention means that Sudan and other Contracting Parties have accepted the jurisdiction of the ICC in this instance. However, this argument only utilizes half of the rationale present in the Bosnia Genocide case. By focusing solely on the obligation to punish created by the Convention, you are ignoring the obligation to prevent genocide that was also highlighted by the ICJ. While there are difficulties in determining what exact steps Contracting Parties have under this obligation, it is still an avenue that supplements the obligation to punish argument in several ways. First, attempting to use U.N.S.C. authority and membership in the Genocide Convention to boot strap a limited acceptance of ICC jurisdiction is unlikely to go over well with those states that have chosen not to ratify the Rome Statute. By arguing that respecting the ICC arrest warrants (by, at the very least, not allowing al-Bashir to travel in your territory without fear of arrest) is required under Contracting Parties’ obligation to prevent genocide, we can provide these states with an alternative basis for compliance that may avoid their objections altogether. Second, the test to determine what action states should take to prevent genocide laid out by the ICJ in the Bosnia Case is a means with which additional pressure can be applied on particularly key states. Factors such as proximity to the violator and ties to the violator are used in determining what steps are expected of states in their prevention obligation; the idea here being that those states that have a greater capacity to influence the violator must take stronger steps to do so. This will allow additional pressure to be placed on African Union states that have criticized the ICC warrants, as well as allies of Sudan. Finally, by emphasizing only the obligation to punish, there is the risk that the ongoing nature of the humanitarian crisis in Darfur will be forgotten. See my earlier comment in this discussion for an expansion of these arguments and citations.