The Maltese government has just used Obama’s ambassadorial choices as justification for its own. Maybe it should ask why Obama’s choices make the international news.
Published:
July 19, 2013 at 10:34am
Of course, the main reason is that the United States is a world power, and Malta is not, so Malta’s ambassadorial choices are never going to interest Reuters and the other agencies.
But the reasons why some of Obama’s ambassadorial choices are newsworthy on an international level are the very same reasons some of the Malta government’s choices, like Labour Party employees Marisa Micallef and Ray Azzopardi, are newsworthy in Malta.
They’re questionable. And that’s about it.
11 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20130719/world/obama-renominates-campaign-donor-for-diplomatic-post.478576
Looks like someone is walking in our Joseph’s footsteps:
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/kevin-rudd-to-send-asylum-seekers-who-arrive-by-boat-to-papua-new-guinea-20130719-2q9fa.html
[Daphne – Not really. Australia is not a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights.]
And therefore big Australia is not obliged to adhere to so called “basic human rights”?
[Daphne – Australia is not a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights. Malta’s legal obligations come under that convention. I have no idea about what treaties/conventions Australia may or may not be a signatory to, and I have no interest in finding out at this stage.]
And the illegal immigrants entering Australia are not fleeing war and other turbulent zones/countries like the ones arriving here. It’s as if you are comparing apples to oranges.
One slight difference is that the USA appointees are all people of international repute in their field and usually carry with them a successful track record in international business, diplomatic studies, and expertise of the region they are posted to.
Not the political appointees. The key criterion is party donations.
It is true that party donations is a criteria but they are all vetted by the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and over the years despite the party donations most of US political ambassadors were people of international standing in their own field.
As one US diplomat once told me: “The US cannot afford to make a mistake in such appointments, because the credibility of the nation is at stake. Many party donors with no proper ambassadorial credentials have failed to be appointed over the years”.
[Daphne – Oh, I don’t know about that. We have had some pretty unimpressive party fundraisers and similar sent to Malta as US ambassador over the years. And a couple of good ones too.]
Yup, party donations seal the deal for who gets appointed to these positions.
Obama has honed this to a fine art and he doesn’t even try to hide this fact.
It is typical corrupt Chicago style cigar smoke filled back room politics brought to Washington DC.
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2013-07-19/news/i-believe-asset-declarations-as-much-as-i-believed-previous-ones-2113044480/
Right, Muscat’s cabinet, according to him, is an agglomeration of Austin Gatts.
I bet he feels fulfiled, snapping at journalists. Kurt got himself an assistant, finally.
Look who were the lawyers in this case involving l-Imniehru who was found dead this morning.
[Daphne – Yes, I know.]
However, the President’s ambassadorial nominations are vetted – and occasionally rejected – by the bipartisan United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.