Party leaders’ selective condemnation of terror

LABOUR party leader Eamon Gilmore played the anti-terrorism card in his party leader’s address to the Labour conference last Saturday.

He expressed sympathy with the victims of the Mumbai attacks in which almost 200 people were killed. There is nothing wrong with that in itself, but his remarks came immediately after his attempt to bring the Labour party back in line with his support for the Lisbon Treaty.

What is wrong is that Gilmore and many other politicians consistently ignore far greater examples of terrorism that happen to be state terrorism. Why is it that 200 people in India, or 3,000 people in the USA, appear to be more important than one million people killed in Iraq due to state terrorism by the US and its allies, or 200,000 people killed in the Darfur genocide by the Sudanese government and its allies?

John Gormley, at his Green party convention, adopted a different but equally flawed strategy. He publicly insulted the Chinese ambassador, representing the most populous state in the world, over the issue of Chinese human rights abuses, but pointedly ignored the US-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the US torture rendition programme, all being facilitated at Shannon airport by the Irish Government of which he is senior minister.

Gormley, Gilmore and most Irish politicians have virtually nothing to say on the greatest tragedy that has occurred since the end of the Cold War, the conflict in the Congo that has claimed up to five million lives so far and is still ongoing.

Being vocally against terrorism perpetrated by small groups and individuals, but being silent on much more serious terrorism perpetrated by states, indicates a western self-interest that takes precedence over genuine humanitarian concerns to the extent that it amounts to an insidious form of racism.

Why is it that Iraqi and Congolese people are not important enough to warrant sympathy?

Edward Horgan

Castletroy

Co Limerick