Fathi Posted 2008-12-03

The United Nations’ approach to the president of Mauritania, who was illegally discharged by a gang of mutinous soldiers, really resembles a criminalisation of the victim. The task of its soldiers is to defend the borders of the country against external aggression, not to interfere in internal politics, and especially not to do so flagrantly by overthrowing a democratically elected president. According to observers, the last elections in Mauritania were the most honest and transparent in this region, which is known for dictatorships, the intimidation of voters and the rigging of polls. It is truly regrettable that the democratic countries, with the West at the helm, are, after having disapproved of the coup d’état, now looking for a dishonourable out by rejecting their responsibility to the victim of these evildoers. A president who was illegally discharged from his office and placed under house arrest neither has power, nor influence. It is evident that the United Nations were expecting him to accommodate the junta be making concessions and standing behind the new elections. This would have been a violation of any legitimacy because, no matter the term, representatives must finish their incumbency. If they are guilty of breaking the law, then there should be a legal, transparent and public mechanism for punishing them. The United States demonstrated this with the impeachment of Nixon. The same procedure was tried with Clinton but failed. However, everything was done within the law. It is truly unfortunate to see these lesson-givers behave like Sunday priest who tells his followers, “Do as I tell you, not as I do.” America, above all else, is a flagrant example of a country that has gone off course.