....sind für mich keine eindeutigen Positionsbestimmungen.
Vielen Dank aber für den Hinweis auf Chomsky. Den Kern seiner
Argumentation finde ich nicht formaljuristisch. Die Analogie, die er im
vorliegenden Fall zum Hippokratischen Prinzip zieht, finde ich sehr
treffend:
"The US has chosen a course of action which, as it explicitly
recognizes, escalates atrocities and violence -- "predictably"; a
course of action that also strikes yet another blow against the regime
of international order, which does offer the weak at least some limited
protection from predatory states. As for the longer term, consequences
are unpredictable. One plausible observation is that "every bomb that
falls on Serbia and every ethnic killing in Kosovo suggests that it
will scarcely be possible for Serbs and Albanians to live beside each
other in some sort of peace" (Financial Times, March 27). Some of the
longer-term possible outcomes are extremely ugly, as has not gone
without notice.
A standard argument is that we had to do something: we could not simply
stand by as atrocities continue. That is never true. One choice,
always, is to follow the Hippocratic principle: "First, do no harm." If
you can think of no way to adhere to that elementary principle, then do
nothing. There are always ways that can be considered. Diplomacy and
negotiations are never at an end."
Ich wäre gern stolz auf Europa. Ich habe auch nichts gegen die
Militärs, die tun ihren Job. Die Politiker aber, die ihnen
unklare, undurchdachte Aufträge geben, ja, die gehn mir gewaltig
auf den Wecker.