Dear Editor,
An editorial was penned in the Press (KN, October 19, 2021) exalting Colin Powell who passed away recently. The editorial was brilliantly written and sounded like a eulogy – all adulation and exaltation; which is fine, for after all, it is not ‘proper’ to speak ill of the dead especially if lately departed.
Another article was a Project Syndicate contribution in the SN (Nov. 1, 2021) venerating General Colin Powell and written by Chris Patten.
Both writers acquitted themselves creditably demonstrating obvious knowledge and experience. Mr. Patten referenced not only General Powell but also Kofi Annan and Nelson Mandela. Mr. Patten is strikingly familiar in world affairs. He was governor of Hong Kong, and a staunch Conservative Tory. In fact, for most of his life he was a practicing politician. Around 2005 he was appointed Chancellor of the University of Oxford, which was probably titular because he was most probably not graded on academic credentials alone. Oxford is ancient, ranked among the top in the world, where tradition is upheld. Incidentally, in 1980 I was a Visiting Fellow (of Linacre College by default) when I witnessed a formal dinner tradition in Linacre College banquet hall. I am still nonplussed about it, but this is passé. What I can remember are blurred conversations, a surfeit of liquors of any description, and lots of food. The atmosphere was an admixture of raucous solemnity. Soon tradition may be thrown overboard by a political googly – a £155m donation from Vietnam’s richest woman may facilitate a Linacre name change. Also, currently there are equivocal debates with respect to the statue of Cecil Rhodes.
Autres temps, autres moeurs!
Mr. Patten writes glowingly of General Colin Powell, Kofi Annan and Nelson Mandela.
Suffice to say that Mr. Mandela is beyond reproach. He was/is in the good company of M.K. Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.
Kofi Annan has a dubious moral fragility. As UN Secretary-General, he performed very well indeed, passing all the diplomatic niceties. However, he failed miserably and hauntingly in 1994. By his inaction and involvement with then President Bill Clinton, hundreds of thousands were massacred in Rwanda. The prevailing powers failed to heed the plea of the UN peacekeeping General Romeo Dallaire and ignored his warnings about the portended tribal genocide. No kind of sanitizing by Mr. Patten can dissolve memories of the massacre of some 800,000 people in a matter of days – as the world was awed by the chilling news.
General Colin Powell of Jamaican heritage was an ‘ordinary’ kid growing up in New York City. Somewhere/somehow his persona was transmogrified from the unassuming kid to that of the soldier. He became a soldier and he served commendably both in office and the field. What I find distasteful (probably because I do not share his philosophical and political outlook) is that as a young black man he pursued a military (meaning war) career and served faithfully under two republican presidents. Of course, he had that right to do so! During his military sojourn, there was no blemish on his character as far as I know. I saw him on TV during the preemptive exchanges prior to President George W. Bush’s attack on Iraq. This was a difficult time following the 9/11 felling of the Twin Towers. These terms are apropos “causa belli” and “casus belli”. As a military man he had to make good assessment and judgement, to be precise, accurate, and with ready preparedness. I make the assumption that he was able to accomplish all his duties meritoriously. On TV General Powell appeared befuddled, confused, and in disarray. As a soldier and a gentleman, I am presuming that he did not know how to lie unabashedly – a good man trying to appease and serve his “masters” George W. Bush and Tony Blair. But he did subscribe to the lies that were generated for the invasion of Iraq – the casus belli. He could have/should have refused to be part of the diabolical plot, as the plot thickened. And we are experiencing the unending ruinous fallout…. For his complicity in this alone, his stature became tarnished, and no amount of whitewashing can remove the stain. Regrettably so!
One must be aware that one’s sincere belief in accuracy and “truth” may nonetheless be an “untruth”, bearing in mind the distinct distinction between truth and truthfulness. One can make an honest mistake, not necessarily be mendacious, just like the difference between an error and a lie. Thus, Mr. Patten should have told the whole story. Should there be convenient omissions and evasions…?
I write this with a heavy heart, as I realize that relatives and friends are still mourning their loss. Painful as it is, one should not be silent, and allow posterity to be fed with distorted history. Moral strength may be measured by taking sides, that is, where one stands in moments of challenges and controversy.
Notwithstanding, I thank Mr. Chris Patten for bringing to the fore the good qualities of these individuals.
Yours faithfully,
Gary Girdhari
