US arrogance knows no bounds

Shanghai Star. 2003-06-26

Today I was watching BBC World when George W. Bush came on speaking at a conference on genetically modified (GM) foods in California.

He was telling the Europeans that their desire not to support or buy GM foods was wrong and was contributing to famine in Africa. Their decision, he said, was based on - and this is the funny bit - "unfounded fears".

Unfounded fears? Now, wouldn't that be like starting a war in a country because they allegedly had weapons of mass destruction? Weapons of mass destruction which, as of now, have not been located ... about the existence of which the UN weapons inspector expressed doubt.

A war begun on the "unfounded fears" that Iraq might have and use these weapons. A war with ulterior motives. Just as it has been suggested that George Bush may have ulterior motives for supporting bio-tech companies.

While we're on the topic of the war in Iraq, I'd like to express my grave concern about the changes in the Belgian war crimes law recently. This law allows people who have committed war crimes to be brought to justice. Most pertinently, someone had wished to start a lawsuit against various members of the coalition forces that led the war on Iraq including George W. Bush and Tommy Franks.

The result was diplomatic outrage leading to the changing of the law to only cover people who are directly connected to Belgium. In order to save diplomatic face for America, victims of war crimes all over the world now no longer have a place to take their pleas.

This is a step backward for human rights. Yet, America is constantly criticizing other countries for their human rights abuses.

Under the changed law, if the crime takes place in a democratic country, then the case will be referred back to the country itself. Just because a country is democratic, does not mean that those who commit war crimes will be brought to justice. This is especially true if the perpetrator is a political leader in that country.

As part of their "encouragement" to the Belgians to change the law, America threatened to remove NATO headquarters from Belgium, or at least lessen the power of the aforementioned.

Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't institutions such as NATO and the UN supposed to represent the interests of the entire world, rather than just the US? As I type that, I let out a peal of cynical laughter.

From where does the American Government gain the ability for this seeming immunity to answering for its actions? Let me remind you that we are talking about the only country to ever use nuclear weapons, the country responsible for massive greenhouse emissions that refuses to ratify the Kyoto agreement, the country whose idea of creating peace in the world is to go to war.

If the world continues to let the US do what it wishes, where will that leave us?

[email protected]



Copyright by Shanghai Star.