March 21, 2013 by soniauwimana
Associated Press reports that the US government has implied that Rwanda may not cooperate with the ICC over the transfer of Bosco Ntaganda.
Not kidding. The verb “imply” is in the headline: US Implies Rwanda Hasn’t Assured Warlord’s Passage.
My first thought was, “wow I cannot recall seeing ‘imply’ in a headline before”; my second thought was “that’s probably because when something is implied — as opposed to said and verified — it wouldn’t typically qualify as reportable news”; and my third thought was “has Jonny Hogg started working at AP?”
Arghh. These people. Honestly.
In any event, how precisely did AP come to this shaky conclusion?
This, from the story:
“We hope that the Rwandan government will do its part,” [Assistant US Secretary of State for African Affair Johnnie] Carson said in a telephone press conference from Washington. “It is a small but significant part to ensure that Bosco Ntaganda is able to move freely from the American embassy compound to the airport where he will board a plane and go to The Hague.”
Carson said it’s important that Ntaganda’s movement from the embassy to the airport “in no way be inhibited.”
Hmm. That isn’t really implying Rwanda is about to block the transfer of Ntaganda, which — let’s face it — would precipitate a major diplomatic impasse on a truly newsworthy scale. My reading is that Johnnie “Choice Have Consquences” Carson is merely saying that Rwanda has an important part to play, and he hopes they play it. That’s really about it. I wasn’t physically present when Carson spoke so I can’t be sure that his remarks were accompanied with knowing winks — if so, perhaps AP should include the stage directions to help guide readers like me who are less adept at inferring very well hidden imputations.
Also, Rwanda’s Foreign Minister Mushikiwabo, Justice Minister Karugarama, and President Kagame have all said — not implied, SAID — that Rwanda will fully cooperate with the US over the transfer of Ntaganda. Repeatedly. But AP doesn’t see fit to include these explicit, clear-as-a-bell statements. Why would they? That wouldn’t be any fun.