Because a left wing policy that called for respect for the democratic rights of subject populations was exactly the stance that should have best followed through to defense of the Kurds. If the left had not totally opposed NATO intervention but criticised it, then it could have linked the criticism to the need likewise to defend the Kurds.
Chris Burford
London
First, the "left" did not "totally" oppose the NATO bombing. There were plenty of those left-of-center who cheered on the pilots in this "humanitarian" action. Second, the idea that one's tactical criticism of (but not opposition to) imperial bombing would serve as collateral in another human rights nightmare is so ridiculous as to be inspired. By your logic, those who called for a halt to the violence in East Timor were not taken seriously because they were blindly opposed to the NATO bombing of Serbia. Thus, thousands of Timorese were either killed, maimed or displaced simply because portions of the left were too stubborn to see the Big Picture. Well, I must say, I never would have thought this up myself.
DP
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20010125/ded502a0/attachment.htm>