 |
| You want them now, right now? |
I say pointlessly because the gesture has come too late to send the right message to the Libyans who put their lives on the line to topple him. Now that Gaddafi is done in, the powerful symbolism that the gesture could have had earlier has been totally lost. In fact, it might be politically counterproductive with the new leadership.
The PL has agreed with government on the matter. This is even more acutely embarrassing. They have spent six months not taking sides in the conflict, not once mentioning Gaddafi by name as the source of the poltical evil in Libya. The first time they mustered the courage to mention it is now that he is a goner. Utterly spineless.
For the record, I had called for the medal stripping exercise on 8 March, before I started this blog. Here is the piece for the record.
"Let's get them off his chest, before we get him off ours"
It is an embarrassment to our country that these medals are still pinned to his chest as more innocent Libyan blood is poured on them. You can see one of the medals on his belly, just below the green sash.
Only a decision by the majority of our MPs in parliament can strip him of these medals. I suggest that they take it now, preferably before he is toppled from power. This is a time for solidarity with our neighbours. Let us show them that the highest institution in the land has the courage to take a stand and be counted. Let's get them off his chest, before we get him off ours.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
6 comments:
From a national security perspective, I think that that would have been too risky.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcdrJSDqEwY&sns=em
Fl-okkazjoni tal-20 sena anniversarju mit-twaqqif tas super 1
Lou, three questions:
1) Would you still argue that you were right if the situation today was totally different? If your opinion is as principled as it seems to be, then you might need to explain a bit more.
2) If the answer to 1) is yes, then would that introduce any new risks? And how would you propose to manage that?
3) In March, could we have been sure enough on how the situation would evolve in the future?
The Maltese have done what they could. That's all.
Oh, and you should post a list of the Maltese, British and American companies benefiting from the Libyan conflict.
Cheers..
Christian,
1. I called for the medal stripping in March because that was the right to do. I don't see a reason that could have changed my mind, had Gaddafi triumphed instead of the rebels. I called for the stripping because he is a dictator, not because he was about to win or be toppled.
2. Like a civilised country we followed the UN's decisions. Had Gaddafi survived he would have created problems for us in any case, with or without medals.
3. No we weren't absolutely sure although with Obama, Sarkozy and Cameron on the case, it was pretty obvious that the end was predictable. On another level, the man is a murderer and we should have used the occasion of the conflict to acknowledge that he is and realign our relationship with him. Whatever the economic consequences.
Yes, "agreed". But the man is unfortunately not the only murderer around. And Malta is in no position to be that principled with every present and future murderer... I mean, this is Malta not the U.S.
Therefore, I think that we've done well: less emotion, more thinking. It's a little bit like chess.. You distract yourself for a moment, and you're done...
To my opinion, a slightly bigger picture (or different dimension to the discussion) is this: in a world where terrorism proliferates, neutral countries should remain as neutral as possible... Especially the tiny ones... By siding against Gaddafi, Malta would be siding with the U.S. and the U.K., and Malta does not afford the security that the U.S. and the U.K. do... So let's concentrate on economic growth... Libya doesn't really need us to solve its issues...
So Frank Portelli was right on this issue!
Post a Comment