Klassic Koncertación
In mid July, 1995, Dutch United Nations Peacekeepers looked on as Serbian forces entered the safe zone at Srebrenica and slaughtered 8,000 Bosnian Muslims, the women who survive were all raped, a Serb yanked one woman's baby from her arms and slit its throat, then laughed.
Which makes it not at all that surprising, or a big deal even, that the UN would seriously consider giving Chile a seat on the Human Rights Council. Chile's human rights record is dismal and it's not just Pinochet. In fact, it's hard to know where to begin.
We could talk about the indigenous population but that's boring because a) it's happening right now and b) you expect me to care about Indians? Also jail conditions are deplorable but those criminals broke the law so they deserved it. On top of that it's happening right now so fuckit.
Let's talk about the past, and the perception one might have that Chile is really taking the human rights bull by the horns, dismissed:
But while we're talking about symbolism, it's just like Chile to want to sit pretty on a human rights council, even a UN human rights council, after such pathetic treatment of past human rights issues, not to mention present ones. Apropo there's a debate raging about whether Chile should send 200 troops to UN's Darfur mission and I think either form of Chilean UN participation is totally ludicrous but if you're gonna export hypocrisy you might as well get your hands dirty. Darfur or nothing. Although it'll be interesting the UN's take on the tithe that Chilean soldiers are forced to pay to fund the legal defense of human rights abusers. (While that obligatory tithe is supposed to be rescinded soon, it will remain voluntary).
State money funding peacekeeping in Darfur to paying for the defense of human rights abusers, now that's a story although it'll never make the headlines like Srebrenica did.
Chances are Chile won't send troops to Darfur, no big surprise as Pinochet wouldn't send troops to Somalia, because it was dangerous and he was right. Although to be honest I would expect more courage from Pinochet, who valiantly defended the Fatherland against folk singer Victor Jarra, specious enough but undoubtedly a spokesman for the imminent Red Wave of the MIR, which really flexed their muscle...um...
What a fucking pussy.
So many Chilean are getting all uppity because they think Bachelet's weak, explicitly/implicitly because she's a woman I assure you she's only standing on the shoulder's of giants. Her whole coalition is a continuance of Pinochet's legacy, one which declared "war" on a resistance which was largely comprised of poets, artists and intellectuals, what he did was tantamount to slitting the throats of babies.
Nothing, mind you, that the UN wouldn't condone.
Which makes it not at all that surprising, or a big deal even, that the UN would seriously consider giving Chile a seat on the Human Rights Council. Chile's human rights record is dismal and it's not just Pinochet. In fact, it's hard to know where to begin.
We could talk about the indigenous population but that's boring because a) it's happening right now and b) you expect me to care about Indians? Also jail conditions are deplorable but those criminals broke the law so they deserved it. On top of that it's happening right now so fuckit.
Let's talk about the past, and the perception one might have that Chile is really taking the human rights bull by the horns, dismissed:
Meanwhile, the amnesty law decreed by Pinochet in 1978, which forbids prosecution for human rights crimes committed between the coup d’état on Sept. 11, 1973 and Mar. 10, 1978, has yet to be rescinded.So okay I'm quoting selectively and there are more prosecutions happening and that is actually good, but it's tortuously slow and the clock is ticking.
In September 2006 the Inter-American Court of Human Rights found Chile guilty of failing to investigate and prosecute those responsible for the death of Luis Alfredo Almonacid, a teacher and Communist Party activist killed in 1973, because of the application of the amnesty law.
All four Coalition for Democracy governments, in turn, have promised these ratifications, as well as the repeal of the amnesty law, but have failed to deliver.and
human rights organisations are demanding that the amnesty law be revoked, to prevent the risk of its being used in future. Bachelet has promised to make the amnesty law inapplicable, but how this is to be achieved is still unclear.Klassic Koncertación. The liberal government's wishy-washy stance is devastating to public psyche. Even if international crimes against humanity don't take the amnesty law into account, you would hope that Chile, the country that should know best, would make a definitive strike against the law, if not for the protracted and dangerous legal tedium it could and probably will continue to cause (similar to how Pinochet died before tried) the amnesty law needs to be striked down for symbol's sake, katharsis.
But while we're talking about symbolism, it's just like Chile to want to sit pretty on a human rights council, even a UN human rights council, after such pathetic treatment of past human rights issues, not to mention present ones. Apropo there's a debate raging about whether Chile should send 200 troops to UN's Darfur mission and I think either form of Chilean UN participation is totally ludicrous but if you're gonna export hypocrisy you might as well get your hands dirty. Darfur or nothing. Although it'll be interesting the UN's take on the tithe that Chilean soldiers are forced to pay to fund the legal defense of human rights abusers. (While that obligatory tithe is supposed to be rescinded soon, it will remain voluntary).
State money funding peacekeeping in Darfur to paying for the defense of human rights abusers, now that's a story although it'll never make the headlines like Srebrenica did.
Chances are Chile won't send troops to Darfur, no big surprise as Pinochet wouldn't send troops to Somalia, because it was dangerous and he was right. Although to be honest I would expect more courage from Pinochet, who valiantly defended the Fatherland against folk singer Victor Jarra, specious enough but undoubtedly a spokesman for the imminent Red Wave of the MIR, which really flexed their muscle...um...
What a fucking pussy.
So many Chilean are getting all uppity because they think Bachelet's weak, explicitly/implicitly because she's a woman I assure you she's only standing on the shoulder's of giants. Her whole coalition is a continuance of Pinochet's legacy, one which declared "war" on a resistance which was largely comprised of poets, artists and intellectuals, what he did was tantamount to slitting the throats of babies.
Nothing, mind you, that the UN wouldn't condone.
posted by Chileno @ 4:22 PM
Share on Facebook
Search This Blog:
8 Comments:
Overblown.
I would care about this if the UN were actually run well in the first place.
Seems to me Chile would be a more appropriate member than, Russia, Bosnia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt just to name a few. Now, I understand the point that you're making, and while I agree that hypocrisy is bad, what country could sit on the council and be impervious to such accusations?
You also contradicted yourself saying that soldiers are “forced to pay to fund the legal defense of human rights abusers.” Then you disagree with that by saying, “(While that obligatory tithe is supposed to be rescinded soon, it remains voluntary)”
In conclusion, I favor Chile as a member of the Human Rights Council.
Anyway, I like the blog. Keep up the good work!
Joel, I didn't contradict myself. The tithe is mandatory, and there's a possibility it will soon become only voluntary. To clarify that I'm changing "it remains voluntary" to "it will remain voluntary". Thanks.
Anyway, you're right every country has a bad human rights record but the whole point is that it'd make sense for people to listen to Chile if the Koncertación had wiped it clean but the fact that they're promulgating the abuses, applying Pinochet's anti-terrorism laws to Mapuches and letting many junta torturers run free, or not prosecuting them fast enough. You can make arguments till doomsday about the causes of why justice is being served so slowly, that's fine, but don't meanwhile sit on a UN Human Rights Council. Or fine, go ahead, because, as I point out, the UN has a dismal record as well. You point out that it's badly run too.
I favor Chile as a member of the Human Rights Council.
Are you being ironic?
You fail to explain your position.
I shall explain my position.
If human rights violations could be assigned numeric values, Chile's addition to the Human Rights Council would reduce the average human rights numerical deficit attributable to the current members. Therefore, I see Chile's membership as a positive step for the UN.
Incidentally, I think the UN has become an all but worthless international body, and it should be reconstructed from the ground up with something more effective similar to NATO.
That said, I agree with your position, especially as it comes from a blog which is focused on Chile. I think that from a Chilean perspective, you could argue that there should be more self criticism concerning membership to the human rights body.
About the mandatory voluntary contributions...I'm still confused. Are there two separate funds, one of which is mandatory, and the second is voluntary?
>>>If human rights violations could be assigned numeric values
They can't. That is complete wankery on your part and I hope you know it. Or maybe you could come up with some numeric values, but you haven't, so you can't make a definitive statement about it.
Voluntary contributions. Follow the link and read the Nacion article - can you read Spanish? - Currently .23% of a military wages is deducted for that defense. Just one fund. They're trying to change that, and hopefully it will change so that the tithe is no longer a mandatory deduction. Once that change goes through, if it goes through, then it looks like they're going to keep the tithe in place as a voluntarily contribution.
What might be confusing (although I haven't mentioned it yet) is that officials are saying that the current tithe is voluntary, when it is absolutely mandatory, and the military funds legal defenses for torturers.
Hello. I was surprised to read your take on UN soldiers' behaviour. Professional soldiers don't just shoot bad guys. They enforce orders, and act within rules of engagement. Orders and ROEs are written so as to give purpose, predictability and coherence to military action.
It is really tough to watch something horrible and stand by, but that was their mission! Had they freaked out and intervened, the following would likely have happened:
1 - They would have been slaughtered.
2 - The civilians would have been slaughtered anyways.
3 - All UN forces would have been deemed enemy forces by the element, and their missions would have been compromised.
In the sense that their status is that of impartial observers, blaming them for failing to stop the killing is a bit like blaming journalists for not stopping a cop from beating a demonstrator.
Had the soldiers decided to discard their observer mission and intervene directly in the war, their only recourse would have been to call in an air strike. Air strikes in cities? Have you been reading the news lately?
Listen we can talk about Srebrenica all night long but this post ain't about Srebrenica, way to run with that red herring. The only point I'm making is that they stood by and watched it happen (and they're getting sued by the survivors, we'll see what happens with that) and there's a chance that the UN, although obviously in a vastly different capacity, will stand by and watch Chile get lauded for Human Rights awareness when the liberal concertacion can hardly wipe its own human rights ass. This post is much more a hit piece against the Chilean government and its ambitions to rose-color reality than anything else. Golf-clap if they can get a human rights council seat but here's what I think about that.
Thanks for that link to the Victor Jara article. I was AT that concert in London in 1998 ... you always seem to bring up things in your blog that touch on places I've been to and people I've met.
So, the story: -
I was in our London office in Sept.'98 ... and Jorge Coulon of Inti Illimani contacted me - asking me to meet them at the Royal Festival Hall on the Thames for an early dinner, before the Victor Jara commemorative concert. I hadn't seen my Inti friends in Santiago for a year or two, so it was a great reunion to see them all in London. Inti Illimani was the featured group at the concert organized by Joan Jara (Victor's English widow)and Emma Thompson (of film renown).
We ate a pre-concert dinner on an outside deck at the Festival Hall, overlooking the Tower Bridge on the Thames. A wonderful place for friends to be together. At my table were Jorge Coulon and his brother, Emma Thompson, Joan Jara - and some Englishman I didn't recognize. Later I realized it was Peter Gabriel ... and he was a guest performer at the wonderful, sold-out concert later that evening.
Joan Jara gave me a couple of copies of her book - "VICTOR - An Unfinished Song", one of them signed. Next time we meet I'll give you the other copy (the unsigned one!!) in gratitude for the enjoyment I get from your blog.
A month later, in October '98, Scotland Yard arrested Pin8 - and held him for the next 18 months, despite his friend Thatcher's protests - God bless the Brits. Too bad they didn't ship him to Spain. We had a wild party to celebrate his arrest that night - a few of us wound up in the fountains in Trafalgar Square - after numerous bottles of Newcastle Brown Ale!
I just listened to Victor's "Te Recuerdo Amanda", as I wrote this comment. Thanks Will.
I love Newcastle, I imagine it's better in England than the exported stuff, they say that about Heineken (from Amsterdam). Tom, that's a lovely offer but I won't accept your gift unless you give me the signed copy.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home