« WMD, Again | Main | Civility »
The logician from Sudan
According to this article:
'Sudan warned Britain and the United States not to interfere in its internal affairs Thursday after British Prime Minister Tony Blair said he had not ruled out military aid to help combat the crisis in the Darfur region.
' "I don't understand why Britain and the United States are systematically increasing pressure against us and not operating through the United Nations ," Sudanese Foreign Minister Mustafa Osman Ismail said on a visit to Paris.
' "(This) pressure closely resembles the increased pressure that was put on Iraq (before the war)," he said.'
Perceptive fellow, huh?
But - wait:
' The United States has drafted a U.N. resolution that would impose an immediate travel and arms ban on militia members.
' "We don't need any (U.N.) resolutions. Any resolutions from the Security Council will complicate things," Ismail said. '
The minister must be a zen master, as he seems to delight in paradox - operate through the United Nations, don't operate through the United Nations. Maybe he meant: operate through the General Assembly! (Yes, I know, we can thank the U.S. for "emboldening" the Assembly way back when, on the cusp of the Korean War). Perhaps his position isn't incoherent - it may be unintentionally honest: the minister learned from the debacle over Iraq that U.N. deliberations are a nearly sure-fire way to arrest the momentum of some pressing action. If he was a gamblin' man, he might even have added, " Heck, let 'em pass a resolution!"
And, anyhow - what's the good minister doing in Paris? I thought that despots aren't welcome there. Maybe their emissaries are ...
July 22, 2004 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834205dc953ef00e5501e3e0a8833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The logician from Sudan:
Comments
Give him this much - he's not quite as bad as Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf.
From Sudan's perspective, his paradoxical argument "works" - the UN shouldn't act, because that's counter-productive, but nobody else should act without UN approval. Meanwhile, death goes on as usual in Darfur.
Posted by: Aaron at Jul 23, 2004 7:59:10 AM
The story in Sudan appears to be -- or perhaps this is just my hope -- one in which the UN, and the US, are playing a secondary role to the African Union, which is sending a force of peacekeepers to Darfur. However, I doubt that the African nations will get it together like they briefly did, in the 90s, to kick out Mobutu. Still, an interesting development.
Have you checked out this weblog? http://passionofthepresent.org/
Posted by: roger at Jul 29, 2004 10:23:25 AM