When reading on the atrocities that occurred at Sbrenica and the ineffectiveness of the UN to address leader Ratko Mladic, it got me thinking about how international institutions, though well-intentioned, consistently enable wars like these through their collective silence. One would wonder that if a leader's actions are publicly condemned, why would he still be allowed to participate in international circles and continue to receive politeness instead of protest? This reminds me of how a country can denounce one thing while still feeding their economy - a casual look-the-other-way, if you will...consider Equatoguinean President Nguema Obiang, who has been long cited by the U.S. for violation of human rights and political fairness, yet continues to receive support for his government-backed oil companies.
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/7221.htm
Sanctions for abusers of human rights should be swift and absolute, and should, for all reasons, involve a dissolution from international trade and communication. Could Mladic have been stopped? I feel he could have been.
No comments:
Post a Comment