Some of the reactions to my article "Stoltenberg's co-responsibility for Srebrenica" in Ny tid 5 August testify that we in the Norwegian public still have a very long way to go before Stoltenberg's co-responsibility is acknowledged.
The fact that the protagonist himself gives an "answer" that is not at all about what the criticism is about (as if what he is being criticized for not complying with his reporting obligation to the UN) does not make the recognition easier. Thorvald Stoltenberg's steadfastness and declared flawedness deny his reputation as a man of dialogue and reconciliation.
Gunnar Garbo is among those who believe that Stoltenberg has no reason to regret anything, or put it another way: that the claim about Stoltenberg's co-responsibility for Srebrenica is "completely overstrained" (debate post in Ny Tid 12 August). That this claim still – after 10 years filled with journalists 'and academics' research, UN-initiated investigation reports, the Dutch Srebrenica report and various trials in The Hague – can be perceived as "completely overstrained" here on the mountain, says a lot about how protected Stoltenberg's own version has been in the Norwegian media.
Americans quit the job
Let me clarify . . .
To continue reading, create a new free reader account with your email,
or logg inn if you have done it before. (click on forgotten password if you have not received it by email already).
Select if necessary Subscription (69kr)