I Needed to Step Back.

After spending the weekend explaining how the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) allowed itself to be caught up in a hysterical momentum to pass a most probably illegal resolution on Syria I decided it was time for me step back and gain a sense of perspective. I was considering putting up a post yesterday (16/4/12) explaining that charming as they are I'll be trying to move away from the random stream of consciousness posts. However I wanted to avoid clashing with the first day of the Beivik trial in Norway that is being carried live across both of Britain's free to air TV news channels. Apparently I'm being cast in the Breivik role.

Anders Behring Beivik is the man who killed 77 people in a twin bomb attack and gun rampage in Norway in July 2011. Although the death toll was far lower in terms on the impact they had on Norwegian society these attacks are comparable to the impact that the September 11th attacks of 2001 had on the USA. Therefore the trial is being widely televised because everybody in Norway needs to see justice done in order to help them heal. Although I don't think that's the intention it is also a great advert for Norway. In places like Britain and the USA a trial of this magnitude would be delayed for at least a year so everyone can agree on the script. However in Norway they still consider one of the main priorities to be the rights of the man who committed one of the worst atrocities in the nation's history.

I avoid using the word "allegedly" in this instance because no-one is disputing that Breivik carried out the attacks. Instead his defence team are arguing that he suffers from paranoid Schizophrenia of such severity that he was not aware of his actions at the time of the attacks. The prosecution are arguing that Breivik suffers from narcissistic personality disorder meaning that he will knowingly do absolutely anything to draw attention to himself regardless of the impact his actions have on other people. Breivik himself is disregarding his defence team and arguing that he carried out the attacks as an act of self-defence. This approach will fail unless Breivik is able to demonstrate that there was both an immediate threat to himself or others and that there was a reasonable expectation that his actions would remove that threat. It is up to the Court, the Norwegian people and Breivik himself to decide if this approach helps prove the prosecution case.

In terms of Norway's involvement in the Syria observer mission it is that question of self-defence that gives me cause for concern. It might lead to a situation where Norway is being forced to say one thing loudly in public while trying to say the exact opposite quietly in private. As for how much Norway are involved in the Syria observer mission I honestly don't know because the UN are still being highly evasive. What I do know though is that one team member is Finnish, another is Brazilian and the mission leader is Moroccan.

As for the Breivik trial I do not think there is anything to be gained by me - personally - commenting on it further because Britain is certainly trying to impose it's own meaning on events.