Yesterday morning the prime minister of Denmark, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, confirmed his candidacy for the post of Nato secretary general. We have known about this possibility for many weeks, but yesterday his plan became official.
Alle 28 NATO lande samles i Tyskland i går for middag og afstemningen. NATOs regl er at alle 28 medlemslande skal stemme enstemmigt og sædvanligvis er dette simpel fordi alle er enig med det bedste valg for NATO og verden men kontroversi er stiget omkring Rasmussens kandidatur.
All 28 NATO countries gathered yesterday in Germany for dinner and the vote. NATO´s rule is that all 28 member nations must have a unanimous vote and usually this is simple because everyone is in agreement about what is the best choice for NATO and the world, but controversy has risen surrounding Rasmussen´s candidacy.
Den 28 NATO lande er: / The 28 NATO countries are:
Albania, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech, Republic Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, & United States
Kontroversien om Rasmussens kanditur er kommet fra Tyrkiet og landets præmiereminister så han har sagt at han vil ikke støtte Rasmussen som den nye NATO general sekretær. Og faktisk har han fortalt Obama at "USA heller ikke skulle støtte Rasmussen." (Men ingen pres, Obama...)
The controversy about Rasmussen´s candidacy has come from Turkey and the country´s prime minister as he has said that he will not support Rasmussen as the new NATO secretary general and in fact, he has told Obama that "the US should not support Rasmussen either." (But no pressure, Obama...)
Men hvorfor? Er det fordi Rasmussen har ingen erfaring? Nej.
Eller fordi Rasmussen har været en dårlig medlem af NATO? Nej.
Eller fordi Tyrkiet har anden kandidat at de tror er bedre? Nej.
But why? Is it because Rasmussen has no experience? No.
Or because Rasmussen has been a bad member of NATO? No.
Or because Turkey has another candidate that they believe is better? No.
Uanset hvad han siger er grunden, tror jeg at vi kan læs her for at se hvor kontroversien begyndte. Og det gør mig trist. Meget trist. I 2005 forsvarede Rasmussen Danmarks LOV af yntingsfrihed---hvilket havde ingenting at gøre med religion men i 2009 er han stadig kritiseret for det til niveauet at eneste Muslim land som er medlem af NATO ønsker de at blokere hans kandidatur.
Regardless of what he says is the reason, I believe we can read here to find out about where the controversy began. And this makes me sad. Very sad. In 2005 Rasmussen defended Denmark´s LAW of free speech---which had nothing to do with religion, but in 2009 he is still being crticized for it, to the point that the single Muslim country that is a NATO member wants to use this to block his appointment.Jeg er ikke enig med (eller kan lidt) alting at jeg læser i de danske aviser men jeg indser at JEG BOR I DANMARK---og det er mit ansvar at forstå den danske lov fordi den danske lov var her FØR mig og vil være her EFTER mig. Jeg tror at skulle alle lande ville en leder som forsvarer landets grundlov.....uanset hvad. Og jeg har håbet at NATOs medlemlande tror den samme.
I do not agree with (or like) everything I see in the Danish newspapers, but I realize that I LIVE IN DENMARK---and it is my responsibility to understand the Danish law because Danish law was here BEFORE me and will continue to be here AFTER me. I believe that all countries should desire to have a leader who defends its Constitution....no matter what. And I have hoped that NATO´s member countries believe the same. 27-YES, 1-NO
Too bad they didn't want to give it to a Canadian:p
I don't see the relevance between the cartoon and NATO. They're two completely matters...every country has their personal agenda and I certainly don't see Turkey as leader of NATO either.
I believe your right. The comic strips in Jyllandsposten and the Kurdic TV channel available in Denmark.
Since politics is often all about power, it certainly could have something to do with the cartoons. My husband and I were discussing it this morning over the newspaper. He pondered that the reason that Turkey is being difficult might not be the cartoon, although that is the easy excuse for Turkey to use, but because Rasmussen has been part of the group that has questioned Turkey's candidacy to the EU. Turkey has been waiting for years to find out if it can be part of the EU and there is nothing they can do to speed up the process, resulting in grumbling all around and a general feeling of incompetence. Then here comes this NATO thing, where one of the guys who's stalled their EU candidacy is involved and here they CAN show their power and influence.
Or it could be some sort of internal Turkish politics, the president using the situation to show that he does take Islam seriously, even though he's a moderate, in an attempt to win appeal with the hard liners.
There are so many things going on and so many forces at work that it's hard to know for sure.
Good news! It sounds like Obama has had his way with Turkey. Rasmussen is in!
Yeah, I forgot the EU candidacy. This will most likely not be resolved until the Cyprus situation is resolved.
Yeah I think it has to do with the cartoon that was a huge issue awhile back. I don't think Denmark has ever been truly forgiven by the muslim countries for what they feel was a huge wrong doing toward their religon. I'm not agreeing that this is reason enough to stand apart from Nato but might explain why Turkey is being a big...well Turkey about this...hahahaha...
Turkey is also against a Danish candidate because of the Kurdish Roj TV controversy
The cartoons were offensive to some because they were so very ignorant. We were shown how little the mainstream Dane really knows about the lives of Danish muslims and what they are up against trying to make a life in Denmark. In Denmark there is no law against being ignorant, so the cartoons were published and heralded by Fogh under the flag of so called 'free speech'.
If the average Dane wasn't so ignorant regarding any culture but their own, perhaps these cartoons would have been just a lame joke. I think the reason why there was (and still is) such an unhappy reaction to these cartoons was because of what was behind the pictures, and this was nothing to do with free speech for the sake of free speech.
We tell our children, when they are old enough embrace discernment: just because you can doesn't always mean you should.
The cartoons should always be discussed, maybe in a few more years, people will have a better understanding, if we all keep talking long enough, maybe someone will get a breakthrough somewhere along the line.
It's certainly not a black and white scenario.
But I, for one, am not buying all that 'free speech' baloney. It just doesn't pan out. There were other forces at work, and I suppose the Turkish wouldn't want that to go forgotten.
Well, I'm a Dane and I believe I speak for many Danes when I say that the cartoons were in bad taste.
I do not see them as a statement of a country's freedom of speech or even just as a lame joke, because the people who published them knew that the people targeted by this would not be able to laugh at it. They were a provocation, just for the sake of provocation, and they were extremely rude and insensitive.
What Jyllandsposten did is their responsibility, even though they did it to all of us: the muslims, the Danish businesses, the Danish common man, who suddenly had to defend himself, because it was automatically assumed by many non-Danish muslims that the cartoons represented the Danish population and the Danish government.
In my opinion, Fogh's mistake was to leave matters to their own for so long, instead of starting the damage control way too late.
On the other hand, I do believe in the "free speech baloney", Denmark is a country who has free speech in its constitution (although I'm sure it was not meant to be used this way), so in my opinion Fogh cannot ban the cartoons, the Queen cannot ban them. Even though, they disapprove of them, they have to defend Jyllandsposten's right to post them. The only one who can stop the nonsense are the responsible for the cartoons.
In any case, I won't spam Mads and Kelli's blog with any more politics. It's just that the "If the average Dane wasn't so ignorant regarding any culture but their own" generalization got under my skin, because as you said, it's not a black and white scenario. Things rarely are. :)
I must say that I am sorry for spouting my generalizations about the 'average Dane'. There are of course many Danes who understand and respect cultures that differ to their own. Just sometimes it's hard to find them in an ordinary day.
The fact that we stay here and keep looking in hope is a good thing.
Yeah, there are unfortunately rotten apples everywhere. Definitely keep looking! :)
Which part of Denmark are you in?
Post a Comment