Annan should choose his words more carefully
Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service
(KRT) - The following editorial appeared in the Chicago Tribune on Friday, Sept. 17, 2004:
---
Diplomats are renowned for carefully choosing their words so as not to leave the wrong impression or unnecessarily ruffle feathers. That's particularly true at the United Nations, where diplomats from all over the world practice the gossamer art of persuasion and manipulation through the muffled language of diplomacy.
But U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan abandoned the pretense of diplomacy Wednesday by firing off a very undiplomatic word to describe the Bush administration's decision to free Iraq: "illegal." Goaded by a BBC interviewer, Annan said of the war: "From our point of view, from the (U.N.) charter point of view, it was illegal."
Undoubtedly, legal scholars could get lathered up about what the U.N. charter says and how exactly to define the term "illegal." But that's not really the point here. Illegal is a loaded word. It implies criminality.
Annan's use of the word is irresponsible and reprehensible. It illuminates nothing, nor does it help solve any of the problems in Iraq. Instead, it merely cements the U.N.'s reputation as an international debating society that sometimes talks a good game, but rarely backs it up. That should be illegal.
A world compelled to wait for the U.N. to protect it from peril is not a safer world. If the U.N. had its feckless way, for instance, ethnic cleansing in Kosovo would continue unabated. Instead, President Bill Clinton and NATO bypassed the U.N. Security Council in going to war against Yugoslavia and Slobodan Milosevic in 1999.
Had the U.S. not acted in Iraq, the U.N.'s threat of "serious consequences" if Saddam Hussein didn't disarm would have amounted to what almost all U.N. threats amount to - nothing.
What's even more shameful is that while Annan flings intemperate words, his U.N. stands on the sidelines in Iraq's reconstruction. It blames the dangerous security situation, but Annan is doing little to convince other countries that what happens in Iraq matters to the world, not just the United States.
Elsewhere, the story is much the same. The U.N. dithers helplessly over what to do about the atrocities in Sudan's province of Darfur, a situation that Secretary of State Colin Powell has described as "genocide." The Security Council has so far done little but rely on sweet talk to stop the violence there. It's not working.
Maybe Annan needs a gentle reminder of what the word illegal really means. If so, he need not scan the distant horizon, but simply gaze into his own back yard, where U.N. officials should be wringing their hands furiously over what investigators are finding in a billowing corruption scandal engulfing its Oil-for-Food program. Various investigations are still peeling back the multiple schemes that allowed Hussein to siphon away billions intended to aid Iraqis.
Given the U.N.'s history, Annan should choose his words more carefully.
© 2004, Chicago Tribune.
Visit the Chicago Tribune on the Internet at chicagotribune.com |
