"Promising too much can be as cruel as caring too little" was the truly mind-boggling statemen of U.S. President Bill Clinton before the United Nations Sept. 21. Now he tells us. So much for the "Clinton Doctrine" of humanitarian intervention. Yet as international peacekeepers pour into a devastated East Timor to revive a ghost town, some nagging, impolite questions about the fiasco and its wider meaning can't be avoided.
It was hardly a secret that the Indonesian military was uncomfortable with a referendum on independence; that local militias were aided and abetted by Indonesian local military forces; or that there was a reasonable probability of post-election violence by the militias if the referendum resulted in a pro-independence verdict.
Of course Jakarta bears a heavy responsibility for the tragedy that has befallen the enclave of some 800,000 people, roughly a quarter of whom have now been "escorted" out of the territory. But there is ample blame to go around. Indonesian President B.J. Habibie made an impulsive decision for politically expedient reasons last January to allow the referendum during an unsettled transition period. Why move on such a controversial issue with Indonesia's first democratic elections in nearly four decades approaching in May, and when a new president will be chosen and a new government assembled in November? In any case, he is likely to pay a heavy political price.