Letters | Sunday, 10 January 2010

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

American ambassador’s unwarranted comments

I have my doubts as to whether the present American ambassador has had diplomatic training before being appointed ambassador. I come to this conclusion when reading what the ambassador said about Malta’s neutrality clause in Malta’s Constitution.
When he criticized Malta’s neutrality, the American ambassador was actually was actually criticizing Malta’s Constitution, since the neutrality clause is one of the most important clauses embedded in our Constitution. And it can only be changed by a two-thirds majority in the House of Representatives.
I ask the ambassador: what would President Obama do if, say, Malta’s ambassador to the United States were to criticize some important clause of the American Constitution? I am sure that in no time at all, the Maltese government would be asked to replace the Maltese ambassador, since such criticism would be seen as unacceptable interference in what the American people consider as a sacred cow – the American Constitution.
This is why I am completely perplexed how in Malta our politicians seem dumbstruck by the ambassador’s comments about Malta’s neutrality. And no one rose in parliament to voice his or her indignation at the American ambassador’s remarks. Instead we have heard references to “modernising” our Constitution. I sincerely hope that any “modernisation” of Malta’s Constitution will not include doing away with the present neutrality clause, in order to please the American government and the EU elite in Brussels.
Neutrality is the best safeguard we can possibly have against aggression or terrorist attacks. Remember, the United States of America, despite having the most formidable armed forces and defence systems, couldn’t prevent the 11 September terrorist attack on New York’s Twin Towers and the Pentagon.
Great Britain, Germany, France, Spain, Italy etc… all having similarily formidable armed forces and sophisticated defence systems, having also been the target of terrorist attacks and are under constant terror threats, despite being also member-states of the EU and members of NATO.
As long as Malta maintains its neutrality, our country will not be considered as “an enemy” by anybody and hence, there will be no reason for any act of terrorism or aggression against the Maltese people and country. If the American ambassador does not like our neutrality, he can always ask President Obama to be replaced by a more diplomatic ambassador!

Eddy Privitera
Mosta

Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below.
Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.

EDITORIAL


Priorities in health financing

---

INTERVIEW


Doctor’s orders