Ya win some and ya lose some and ya lose some

Apparently, American exceptionalism is a harder sell at the UN Security Council than it is in the streets of Anytown, USA. I wonder why.

The US has given up trying to win its soldiers immunity from prosecution at the new International Criminal Court. ...

Washington withdrew its resolution after it became clear it would not get the required support.

For the last two years it had secured special status for US troops, arguing they could face malicious prosecutions.

But of course it couldn't be done without the typical Mafioso-type veiled threat.

In the past, the US has threatened to veto UN peacekeeping operations if its demands for exemption from prosecution by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague were not met.

[US deputy ambassador to the UN James] Cunningham did not repeat the warning, but said the US would in future "need to take into account the risk of ICC review when determining contributions to UN authorised or established operations".

"It'll be a shame if something happens to the nice little peacekeeping operation you have there, a real shame. But you were warned...."

(On the other hand, the threat would carry more weight if the US actually lent troops to UN peacekeeping forces.)

Footnote, Actually, BFD Div.: The BBC for June 23, source of the article, also notes that

[e]ven though US troops abroad may now be subject to prosecution at the court in The Hague, Washington has already signed bilateral agreements with 89 countries to ensure they do not bring cases against its personnel.

Gee, what a relief. For a moment there, I thought we were actually agreeing to go along with the world community.