Look who's talking | 4.07.05
In his keynote address at an Institute of European Affairs seminar former PM and certified public statesman Anand Panyarachun did what he pointedly failed to do in his October 2001 interview about 9/11 — condemn terrorism:
Third, the UN has been to slow to mobilise a united front against terrorism in all its forms. All states must speak loudly, clearly and in unison in denouncing terrorism. And they must make the UN an effective international forum for combating it. This will require implementation of the new comprehensive strategy along the lines recommended by the secretary-general in Madrid earlier this year.
It will also require consensus on a common definition of terrorism. Regardless of one’s cause, killing or maiming of innocent civilians and noncombatants can not be justified. Period. That is terrorism, pure and simple. Such moral clarity is imperative if the UN is to fulfil its potential in combating terrorism.
Forceful stuff, but considering who it’s coming from, I can’t help wondering:
- Whether the morals of the fight against terrorism become clear to him only in front of an international audience.
- Whether he considers the daily killings and bombings in his own country — the very ones he’s been rationalizing — to be acts of terror.
It’s shame that some people confuse a lack of principle with diplomacy. Does Khun Anand fall into that category? I can’t really say. He’s too slippery.
19:01 ▪ politics
« Root causes of terror | Main | Rogue Nation Channel and “America War” »