The Snowden Case: International Piracy Against Evo Morales
Published in Il Fatto Quotidiano
(Italy) on 4 July 2013
by Fabio Marcelli (link to original)
(Italy) on 4 July 2013
by Fabio Marcelli (link to original)
Translated from
by Agatha Aissa-Dallongeville.
Edited by Kyrstie Lane.
There is no limit to the brazen arrogance of the imperial power, just as there is no limit to the unashamed servility of the Western states, which are its main servants. The Snowden case is bringing revelations about the spying activities carried out by some American governmental authorities which caused damage to many around the world, “allies” (more accurately serfs) included, and provides opportunities to reflect on this predicament for those whose minds haven’t yet been blurred by the propaganda and the mental and moral passivity of the “Atlantic” mold.
Take a look at what happened to Bolivian president Evo Morales. Putting at risk his personal safety and that of his entourage, some countries, under American pressure, denied the presidential Bolivian airplane permission to fly over because they were afraid that Edward Snowden – the National Security Agency agent who, thanks to his courageous revelations, permitted us to unmask the spying conspiracy carried out by the U.S. on the rest of the world – could be on board.
There was further proof of the paradoxical character and even sometimes grotesque behavior taken on by some countries, such as France, who was the first to be scandalized and denounce the spying of “the great ally” yet complied once again with American wishes in no time by performing an unfair and hostile act toward a sovereign state. Among the most zealous countries we once again found Italy, of course, in the first row of the most submissive serfs of the United States.
The exact circumstances of this illegal action still have to be determined and clarified. Bolivia has spoken of “aggression.” In any case, force was used in a hostile manner and in opposition to the elementary principles of international justice. As some scholars pointed out, to deny air space to a presidential airplane that had previously been duly authorized goes against various rules of international law. First of all, it goes against laws designed to protect the personal and functional immunity of heads of state. These are fundamental rules that may be waived only in the case of international crimes, which clearly didn’t exist in this case, but which might in the United States. In fact Snowden, who was not even on the Bolivian presidential plane, is accused only of violating American laws. And this presumed violation was carried out in homage to a superior legal principle denouncing the serious illegalities committed by the government of the U.S.
The honor of the international community and the safety of the fundamental principles of its law are in the hands of the Bolivian government and of other countries, Latin American and otherwise, who have protested against this serious violation of international law. Others, including European countries, after having vainly made much ado, do not act against the illicit activities of others but rush to help the culprit and keep the witnesses of the crimes quiet. Even at the cost of shattering any international standard.
Take a look at what happened to Bolivian president Evo Morales. Putting at risk his personal safety and that of his entourage, some countries, under American pressure, denied the presidential Bolivian airplane permission to fly over because they were afraid that Edward Snowden – the National Security Agency agent who, thanks to his courageous revelations, permitted us to unmask the spying conspiracy carried out by the U.S. on the rest of the world – could be on board.
There was further proof of the paradoxical character and even sometimes grotesque behavior taken on by some countries, such as France, who was the first to be scandalized and denounce the spying of “the great ally” yet complied once again with American wishes in no time by performing an unfair and hostile act toward a sovereign state. Among the most zealous countries we once again found Italy, of course, in the first row of the most submissive serfs of the United States.
The exact circumstances of this illegal action still have to be determined and clarified. Bolivia has spoken of “aggression.” In any case, force was used in a hostile manner and in opposition to the elementary principles of international justice. As some scholars pointed out, to deny air space to a presidential airplane that had previously been duly authorized goes against various rules of international law. First of all, it goes against laws designed to protect the personal and functional immunity of heads of state. These are fundamental rules that may be waived only in the case of international crimes, which clearly didn’t exist in this case, but which might in the United States. In fact Snowden, who was not even on the Bolivian presidential plane, is accused only of violating American laws. And this presumed violation was carried out in homage to a superior legal principle denouncing the serious illegalities committed by the government of the U.S.
The honor of the international community and the safety of the fundamental principles of its law are in the hands of the Bolivian government and of other countries, Latin American and otherwise, who have protested against this serious violation of international law. Others, including European countries, after having vainly made much ado, do not act against the illicit activities of others but rush to help the culprit and keep the witnesses of the crimes quiet. Even at the cost of shattering any international standard.
Previous article![]( "Dangerous Tension between Russia and US")
Next article![]( "A Historic Verdict")
