[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

FT (UK) bashes Pinochet/Dictators



Lets be fair. A reader publicly on Burmanet misconstrued the meaning
in a previous post and wrongly put emphasis away from the problem of
dictatorship, and our concern of dictatorship in Burma. Today, the FT
(UK) Financial Times, on p 12 publishes Dominique Moisi (dep director of
the Paris based Institut Francais des Relations Internationales) under
their Personal View column "Human rights in transit". It bashes
Pinochet  supporters and tears apart their argument saying "The British
law lords' ruling on General Pinochet demonstrates the progress towards
collective moral responsibility in international
affairs....Globalisation means dictators will have nowhere to hide in
the global village."

This UK Pinochet legal affair is big news for Burma's dictators, and its
happening in Europe. It will be a very interesting year in Europe for
Burma next year. Perhaps the FT feels the wind of change. You may wish
to write the FT editors, send them an email, through their web
<http://www.FT.com> 
Sorry, but i really dont have time to type the whole story
but maybe someone can find it and post it.
Extracts
"As we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Univeral Declaration of
Human Rights, should we feel triumphant and optimistic at the progress
of humanity towards a global order? Or should we remain more cautious,
sceptical, if not cynical at the spectacle of legal breakthroughs that
contrast sharply with an international reality that continues to be
dominated by violence, tribalism and ethnic cleansing?
Two weeks ago, we all felt like 'British Lords', to borrowq an
expression from Daniel Cohn-Bendit, the charismatic student leader of
May '68, who has become once more a media star politician in France.
The decision of the House of Lords over General Augusto Pinochet, the
foremr Chilean dictator, constituted a fundamental revolution in
international law. This revolution was further reinforced by the
decision by Jack Straw, the British home secretary, to authorise the
start of extradition proceedings at the request of the Spanish
government.
More than ever, Britain, regardless of the denuciations of Baroness
Thatcher, fulfilled its role as Europe's moral leader in democracy. At
long last, universalism and extra-territorality are being recognised as
necessary conditions for the efficiency of justice. Soverignty is slowly
giving way or at least fighting a rearguard battle.
However, the struggle is far from over. Contraditions abound. All over
Paris, large posters remind French citizens of their human rights
achievements and their freedom to write and express themselves without
fear of censorship. But at the same time, while France enthusiastically
supported the decision of the House of Lords on Gen Pinochet, the
government was welcoming to Paris President Kabila of the Democratic
Republic of Côngo -- formerly Zaire -- whose human rights record is just
as bad as that of Pinochet.
It is so easy to say that governments support human rights as long as
their recognition does not contradict important national interests. This
occurs not only in Europe but in the US as well."

actually, as I type this i find the article rather confusing, and i
think the author, french rather confused, falling, once again, as the
french often do, into contradiction and ambiguity.
extract
"A global world can onloy lead to contradictory reactions. The more
global we become, the less international we may want to be."

But he does end on an upbeat note:
"Thanks to the decision of the British law lords, we are witnessing an
undeniable progress of humanity towards some universalist criteria.
Progress is bound to be slow and confused. In the years to come we will
need a combination of vigilance and common sense."

at least, this frenchman, widely reprinted by the international herald
tribune over the past 15 years, and elsewhere in the anglo press, is not
afraid to get off the fence, and join in condemning dictatorship.

it only remains for chirac, once again, to catch up and not be undone or
left behind by clinton and blair with whom he likes to be identified
leading the world into the twentieth century.
ds