Profound implications will most certainly follow the collective decisions of EU member nations to actively deny clearance authority to land to the private Government plane carrying the President of the South American country of Bolivia, President Evo Morales.
Apart from actively endangering the life of the President of a country,which is recognised by the United Nations as a sovereign independent nation,this incredible decision, also taken without consideration of the profound implications to the entire EU 'Bloc' will first resonate on the South American continent then gradually filter worldwide as sovereign leaders in Third World countries individually ponder their own fate, should they possibly, at any future time step 'out of line' with the European Union.
I automatically conjure up the Hungarian Uprising of 1956 and the flight of a Cardinal Josef Mindszenty to sanctuary inside the U.S. embassy and where he had to remain for the next 15 years because of Soviet tanks at the gates of the embassy.
I also (for some reason) reminisce the fate of Alexander Dubcek who bravely (initially) stood up to the Soviet invasion of his country during the Prague Spring-and paid the ultimate penalty.
It's effects are likely to be most dramatic on the South American continent.
The first effect could well be asking the EU to close offices' in Latin America.
Secondly, in Bolivia in particular, it could result in EU countries primarily responsible
to being asked to withdraw their Ambassadors.
Again, because of the arrogance and high-handedness of technocratic and bureaucratic
EU mandarins, retaliatory punitive economic and diplomatic sanctions will be imposed on this fairly small and undeveloped independent sovereign nation in South America.
This will resonate across the Latin American continent to no end and ensure Bolivia is
supported 99% (at least) in the Organisation of American States by South American nations-with the U.S. Mexico, Panama, Belize and likely English-speaking Caribbean nations abstaining from any controversial votes-or at least consulting with Her Majesty's Senior Representative before deciding which way to vote.
It's a mess.
It confirms my theory about how 'remote' politicians are becoming from those they govern-especially in the European Union.
I have only visited the EU Parliament on four occasions in my life.
Three times in an official capacity (as an invited guest) and once as a guest of an MEP, shadowing him in his work routine for a short period of time
The first time, I can now say, as it was some time ago, was as a Fellow of The Atlantic Council of The United Kingdom (NATO) when invited as part of a British delegation visiting SHAPE Headquarters where we were, over a number of years, regular guests for military briefings on an annual basis.
I was always looking forward to the actual few days break (and nightlife) in Brussels and secondly to the excellent and very warm reception and briefings afforded to us, which were immensely instructive and always very candid, by our military hosts and the British Representative and Staff at NATO headquarters.
At one informal meeting, I put forward a point of view (then contrary) to NATO policy. I think it was did we ever see a time when the The Russian Federation would become a member of NATO? The U.S. Representative heading this particular briefing Panel was actually aghast that anyone would have the temerity to put such a viewpoint. I must say his answer was openly cordial and diplomatic but the frosty freeze-out I later experienced by this individual suggested that I had outstayed my welcome at his particular briefing.
This was only one of many matters over the years which seemed to confirm my perceptions of 'one fit for all sizes' frame of thinking ('you can have any color of car-as long as it's red!') and a failure to confront realities thrust upon them rather than ones they shape which governs a particular 'clique' mindset and politicians today.
(I was never not invited back for briefings and I personally never saw this particular individual again and on future visits.)
It was also during the Balkans War and when I dutifully (and I still believe to this day, quite correctly) spoke in support of NATO's campaign offensive in Kosovo to prevent the ethnic slaughter of Muslims, at University College London (UCL) against a prominent Guardian journalist, Jonathan Freedland, and won the debate, I might add(!), that I drew on years of training and social experience,being absolutely focused during times of intense debate and avoiding any rash and hasty decisions and rash statements I would likely (unfortunately!) live to regret.
I had geared myself up to speak (at the invitation of ALW) at several university debates about NATOs role in the Balkans conflict. Fortunately the conflict ended before I could further take up the mantle.
About 15 years earlier,and long before the Good Friday Agreement which ended conflict in Northern Ireland, I said to Alan Lee Williams, whose intellect and savvy I always admired, over drinks and a chat at U.S. Naval headquarters, and who was a member of the Atlantic Council (NATO) Parliament, 'never end up on the wrong side of history'. His answer was quite spontaneous :'but what IS the right side of history Patrick?' my equally spontaneous reply was 'it's the side which has righteousness, justice and the lesser of evils we can contemplate for the future of humankind as one humanity on it's side.'
This decision to deny air clearance to the President of a sovereign, developmentally poor, tiny nation, Bolivia should never have been left to bureaucrats but taken at Presidential levels throughout the EU - if quick (instant) consultation and decisions were of essence because of time constraints. (I will be amazed to learn if such was the case. I might be wrong and if I am I will be absolutely shocked.)
A new 'nomenclatura' is running the European Union.
It's one which is toatlly remote from the realities of life of ordinary people-hence the ease with which decisions like this can be made-only deferring to power and not to common-sense nor wisdom nor even the norms of international diplomatic protocol.
What is about to happen will be the first of many 'wake-up' calls for the mandarins and technocrats who silently direct EU policy oblivious to it's effects and the sufferings of the masses they rule-because of their lack of empathy.
They remind me of the experiments I read about whilst a student at University where individuals were invited to electrically 'shock' experimental subjects with the promise of rewards, promotion and praise for the 'most efficient' 'torturers'.
Whether one wake-up call for the EU 'bloc' technocrats and nomenclatura is enough to effect any profound and lasting change I really am in serious doubt because of the nature of 'the beast'.
It took almost 100 years for Communism to finally collapse in Eastern Europe.
I am putting no bets on how long the EU monetary union-let alone the EU as a single 'Bloc' will last.
What I will say is that this incredible decision to actively endanger (at least) slap across the face (at most) the President of Bolivia returning from an international Gas Forum hosted in Moscow by Russian President Putin, is also, indirectly, a slap across the face for President Putin and a signal from the EU of his 'inability' to 'protect' the 'safe passage' (diplomatically) of any world leader, unfavourable to the EU (or whom the EU suspects of any 'infringement' or 'slight' not to it's liking) and who might venture to a conference hosted in Russia and has the misfortune to cross EU territorial airspace in the process. It's a mess.
(Interestingly, concepts of 'Safe Passage' and 'Diplomatic Protocol' for Dignitaries go back to the Mongols-The Great Khan-and the Arabs.)
I don't blame Edward Snowden for this particular debacle-but it confirms my suspicions of the irrational decisions taken in haste surrounding this matter which will have long-resounding and resonating effects on the conduct of world affairs.
I have coined it a 'remoteness' in my article 'Edward Snowden Is Not A Hero' - perhaps I better refine what I am trying to say as a 'sociopathic remoteness' of the rulers and technocrats from those they govern in the developed world-as indeed in many parts of the Third World (or developing world) today.
Because nobody represents me in Brussels, I would like, as an ordinary citizen and as one very ashamed ordinary folk (and as one of the 'peasants' so to speak) to offer my sincere apologies, to President Morales and I believe that if we had a voice, at least one hundred million of us ordinary folk who are not represented in the EU, would concur with such an unreserved apology for such a terrible breach of international protocol and wish President Morales Godspeed, protection and safe passage for his future travels.
Patrick Emek
July 3rd 2.00 am
