VABALOG

Miks Galbright’i “vihjeid” ei tasu liiga tõsiselt võtta

Kohalik ajakirjandus on tänaseks üles noppinud uudise, mille kohaselt võib Afganistani president olla heroiinisõltlane:

“Tegelikult ütlevad mõned (presidendi)palee allikad, et tal on teatud kiindumus Afganistani tulusaimate ekspordiartiklite vastu,” märkis Galbraith, viidates Afganistani esikohale maailma heroiinitootjana. “See jätkuv sõnavaling tõstatab küsimusi tema vaimse stabiilsuse kohta ja ausalt öeldes tekitab see Kabulis diplomaatide seas muret.”

Loomulikult ei ole Karzai esindajad kommentaaridest hoidunud:

Karzai pressiesindaja Siamak Hirawi süüdistas täna Galbraithi valetamises. “Kuna ta on petis ja valevorst, saab sama öelda ka tema viimaste sõnade kohta,” ütles ta AFP-le. “Neid võib võtta näitena sellest, kuidas kõik, mis ta on seni Afganistani ja valimiste kohta öelnud, on olnud sulaselge vale.”

Ega ise kohapeal tegutsemata ei õnnestu tõele lähemale jõuda, kuid esimese hooga kipub tõenäoliselt enamus uskuma pigem ÜRO endist saadikut. Mis Afganistanis toimub on piisavalt kauge ja segane samas kui Karzai manööverdused viimastel valimistel olid enam kui kahtlased. Samas ei tea enamus Peter Galbright’ist midagi, kuid seda viga annab parandada.

David Warsh kirjutas mõni aeg tagasi Galbright’i tegevusest Iraagis enda majanduslike huvide eest seismisel, kus viitas ka üksikasjalikumale New York Times’i artiklile:

Views of Mr. Galbraith’s business ties are harsh within the central Baghdad government, which has long maintained, in stark opposition to Mr. Galbraith’s interpretation of the Constitution, that all the oil contracts signed by the Kurdish government were illegal.

Referring to the Constitution negotiations, Abdul-Hadi al-Hassani, vice chairman of the oil and gas committee in the Iraqi Parliament, said that Mr. Galbraith’s “interference was not justified, illegal and not right, particularly because he is involved in a company where his financial interests have been merged with the political interest.”

Citing what he said were confidentiality agreements, Mr. Galbraith refused to give details of his financial arrangement with the company, and the precise nature of his compensation remains unknown. But several officials, including Mr. Galbraith’s business partner in the deal, the Norwegian businessman Endre Rosjo, said that in addition to whatever consulting fees the company paid, he and Mr. Galbraith were together granted rights to 10 percent of the large Tawke field and possibly others.

Views of Mr. Galbraith’s business ties are harsh within the central Baghdad government, which has long maintained, in stark opposition to Mr. Galbraith’s interpretation of the Constitution, that all the oil contracts signed by the Kurdish government were illegal.
Referring to the Constitution negotiations, Abdul-Hadi al-Hassani, vice chairman of the oil and gas committee in the Iraqi Parliament, said that Mr. Galbraith’s “interference was not justified, illegal and not right, particularly because he is involved in a company where his financial interests have been merged with the political interest.”
Citing what he said were confidentiality agreements, Mr. Galbraith refused to give details of his financial arrangement with the company, and the precise nature of his compensation remains unknown. But several officials, including Mr. Galbraith’s business partner in the deal, the Norwegian businessman Endre Rosjo, said that in addition to whatever consulting fees the company paid, he and Mr. Galbraith were together granted rights to 10 percent of the large Tawke field and possibly others.

Karzai võib olla heroiinisõltlane, kuid Galbright tundub olevat inimene, kelle öeldust ei tasu kergekäeliselt liigseid järeldusi teha.


Categorised as: ...


Lisa kommentaar

Sinu e-postiaadressi ei avaldata. Nõutavad väljad on tähistatud *-ga