Gadaffis rigtige venner

Diverse — Drokles on February 25, 2011 at 5:00 am

Det er næsten ikke til at holde ud i disse tider. Allehånde selvretfærdige indlæg om diverse vestlige regeringers forhold til de mellemøstlige diktatorer, der pludselig er blevet folkets indlysende fjende. Det var de aldrig når debatten om Mellemøsten omhandlede Israel, hvad den jo ellers altid gør, men nu kan alle se det, der for os andre hele tiden var indlysende. Under overskrifter, som Gaddafis gode ven i Vesten, Mubaraks fald kan forvandle Danmark og Diktatorens venner: Berlusconi, Fogh & Co. gør diverse repræsentanter for venstrefløjen sig igen-igen lækre på baggrund af død og elendighed i den 3. verden (eller er det den 2. verden?) og skelner ikke mellem det at stater har interesser  mens personer og organisationer kan have venner. For man er altid er tvunget til at orientere sig efter sin tids vilkår hvorfor Dronning Margrethe den 2. af Danmark på vegne af Anker Jørgensens regering tildelte Ceasuscu Elefantordenen, Som Schûtter senere lod hende tilbagekalde da han ikke længere var comme il faut. Men Det var Hosni Mubarak til gengæld blevet i mellemtiden og han modtog via Schlütter Elefantordenen i 1986. Uha så mange skelleter i skabene.

For hvordan skal man egentlig agere i en omverden af grusomme og primitive kulturer? Skal vi handle med dem selv om arbejdvilkårerne for lønmodtagerne er skrækkelige eller fornægte dem chancen for den indkomst for at vaske vores hænder? Skal man føre kritisk dialog (ikke just noget modeord i disse dage) eller boycot, give u-landshjælp og derved inddirekte støtte til uønskede regimer, skal vi ledsagde humanitære opgaver med militær for at sikre vivilbefolkningen. Skal  man overhovedet tale med dem og derved legitimere deres eksistens? Diskussioner vi med skiftende fronter løbende har om alle mulige situationer i alle mulige dele af verden. Nej det er ikke let og derved umuligt at moralisere over fra håndvasken. Vi er sat i en virkelighed vi ikke selv bestemmer og kan kun handle som vi finder det bedst.

Venstrefløjen har lykkeligt glemt deres agressive krav om at Danmark skulle undskylde for vores forbandede ret til at sige vores forbandede mening om hvad fanden der passer os til bl.a. Libyens ambassadør Mohammed E.R. Rimali, på vegne af Gadaffi. Her skrev Rimali sammen med repræsentant Mona Omar Attia for den dengang socialdemokratiske regeringschef Hosni Mubarak, Ahmad Danialy for det islamlærde Iran,Maie F. B. Sarraf fra det palæstinensere selvstyre (som det er en forbrydelse at sende herboende palæstinensere tilbage til) og Fugen Ok for EU-ansøgende Tykiet i et brev stilet til statsminister Anders Fogh Rasmussen bl.a.

We strongly feel that casting aspersions on islam as a religion and publishing demeaning caricatures of Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) goes  against the spirit og Danish values of tolerance and civil society. This is on the whole a very discriminatory tendency and does not bode well with the high human rights standards of Denmark. We may underline that  it can also cause reactions in Muslim countries and among Muslim communities in Europe.

Ikke bare var venstrefløjen, 12 tidligere danske ambassadører, Uffe Ellemann, Tøger Seidenfaden villige til at lade os belære om frihed og demokrati at den samling banditter, næh de overtog sågar argumenterne, som deres egne. Ja det lyder nærmest som en leder i Politiken eller Berlingske Tidende når vindene på den redaktion svingede i den retning. Ovenstående citat var og er forlægget for 95% af alle indvendinger imod Anders Fogh Rasmussen og Jyllands-Posten: “Islam kan ikke kritiseres uden at det krænker muslimer og således er der tale om diskrimination. Vores renome og selvforståelse vil lide et knæk og det er der ikke plads til i en global verden. Og desuden så vanker der grusomme ting og sager at I (regeringen, nationale og Jyllands-Posten) bare ved det for de er så mange og vi så få”.

Venstrefløjen fejlede altså endeligt i den største principielle debat i nye tid. Solidariseringen med de detroniserede despoters synspunkter kan ikke opvejes af deres historieløse fordømmelser af nogle ligegyldige realpolititiske hverdagskompromisser. Og skulle nye parlamentariske regimer genoptage hadet til den frie tanke vil det blot understrege islams modsætning til os i særdeleshed og demokrati i almindelighed. Ja, sådan går det når man hellere vil holde på andres meninger frem for sine egne. Man pådrager sig så mange falske principper at man bliver helt selvmodsigende.

Venstrefløjen glemmer i det hele taget historien i deres jagt på fordømmerens rus. Det humanistiske fyrtårn og frihedskampens legemliggjorte ideal Nelson Madela kaldte Muammar Gadaffi for sin “kære broder” i en tale fra 1999. South African Government Information

Your Excellencies
Distinguished Guests
And My Dear Brother Leader

Those who dedicate themselves to causes affecting the lives of millions ought to have a clear understanding of history. They should plan their actions with a sense of their impact on those for whom they believe they act.

I know, My Brother Leader, that you and I, who have both been privileged and obliged by circumstance to be in such positions, have each in our own way tried to be true to that responsibility. Even so, we could not have planned things in such a way that you would be the last head of state I would officially receive on a bilateral basis before retiring from public office.

I am happy that it did, by chance, transpire this way.

The relationship between our two selves and between Libya and democratic South Africa has not been without controversy and therefore some special significance in world affairs.

As a responsible member of the international community of nations, South Africa would never defy predominant international opinion deliberately and merely for effect. This is a particular responsibility in a world that is fraught with possibilities of misunderstanding and consequent conflict and conflagration.

We remain convinced that respect for our multilateral bodies and compliance with their decisions, is crucial to stability, development and progress in a world still marked by tension, inequality and backwardness. This is so even where we may disagree as individual nations with those decisions.

In a world where the strong may seek to impose upon the more vulnerable; and where particular nations or groups of nations may still seek to decide the fate of the planet - in such a world respect for multilateralism, moderation of public discourse and a patient search for compromise become even more imperative to save the world from debilitating conflict and enduring inequality.

When we dismissed criticism of our friendship with yourself, My Brother Leader, and of the relationship between South Africa and Libya, it was precisely in defence of those values.

There must be a kernel of morality also to international behaviour. Of course, nations must place their own interests high on the list of considerations informing their international relations. But the amorality which decrees that might is right can not be the basis on which the world conducts itself in the next century.

It was pure expediency to call on democratic South Africa to turn its back on Libya and Qaddafi, who had assisted us in obtaining democracy at a time when those who now made that call were the friends of the enemies of democracy in South Africa.

Had we heeded those demands, we would have betrayed the very values and attitudes that allowed us as a nation to have adversaries sitting down and negotiating in a spirit of compromise. It would have meant denying that the South African experience could be a model and example for international behaviour.

In many ways, our modest contribution to resolving the Lockerbie issue will remain a highlight of the international aspects of our Presidency. No one can deny that the friendship and trust between South Africa and Libya played a significant part in arriving at this solution. If that be so, it vindicates our view that talking to one another and searching for peaceful solutions remain the surest way to resolve differences and advance peace and progress in the world.

We look forward with joy and anticipation to the full re-entry of Libya into the affairs of our continent and the world.

We have already seen Libya take up its role as an important actor on the African continent to help advance the peace process in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

South Africa is proud to acknowledge the coincidence between its own position and SADC’s, on the one hand, and that of Libya on the other. We share the view that peace in the DRC can only be achieved through the withdrawal of all foreign forces and an inclusive political process of Congolese groups.

We appreciate very much Libya’s indication that its own efforts will be co-ordinated with those of our regional organisation, SADC. This approach confounds those who suggest that Libya is less than fully committed to multilateralism. My Brother Leader is involved in the Congolese process as a facilitator of the SADC process, just as we were involved in the Lockerbie issue as facilitators for the United Nations. In such ways we advance the ideals of multilateral co-operation and discipline. And for that we thank our Brother Leader and the Libyan people.

It was with much appreciation that I received reports from my Minister of Trade and Industry about our recent trade delegation to Libya. The friendly political relations between our two countries are now being consolidated and deepened through trade. We look forward to South African companies and Libyan entities bridging our continent from North to South in concrete expressions of African unity.

My Brother Leader, I know that in the abstemious conditions of the North African desert it is not the custom to propose a toast. We are, however, overwhelmed by at last having here on this southern tip of Africa one of the revolutionary icons of our times.

I shall therefore take the liberty to invite our guests to rise and raise their glasses with me in salute to Muamar Qaddafi, our Brother Leader of the Revolution of the Libyan Jamahariya, and to growing friendship between the people of our two countries.

Issued by the Office of the President, 13 June 1999

Ja skål på det for han er en af vor egne, en rigtig guttermand og så fager så han ud. Og så giver han nok en mindre massakre til at gå hjem på. Med bl.a. den tale fik Mandela lempet Libyen tilbage som en del af “verdenssamfundet” (som dækker over de herskende moralske vinde, som realpolitikken dikterer dem). Og hvad skal man mene om at Libyen senere endda fik formandsskabet for FNs menneskerettighedsråd (mens Zimbabwe overtog ledelsen forbæredygtig udvikling!). Hvad skal man i det hele taget med omverdenens fordømmelse af ens renome når nu omverdenen er så fordømt?

3 Kommentarer »

  1. Ingen kommentarer til dette! Det er bare så bragende godt, så jeg ville ønske jeg kunne skrive - eller bare tænke noget halvt så glimrende!

    Tak for den

    Hans Erling

    Comment by Hans Erling Jensen — February 26, 2011 @ 2:01 am
  2. Simpelthen fremragende! Men mon den trænger ind, jeg tvivler.

    Comment by Magnus Buch — February 26, 2011 @ 9:23 pm
  3. Fremragende Drokles. Fremragende!

    Comment by sofakongen — July 17, 2017 @ 4:09 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Kommentér indlægget...

Monokultur kører på WordPress