… by Christiane Amanpour.
He was a very clever man, but in his work he also never lost sight of the moral dimension. He was not a moralist, not by a long shot; but he was a moral man, and he was genuinely committed to using American persuasion and power to lessen the cruelty in the world.
December 20th, 2010 at 4:11PM
Not a moralist but a moral man? A remarkable claim given his despicable acts. His support of the Khmer Rouge certainly did not do anything to ‘lessen the cruelty in the world’. Holbrooke reminds us that self-serving frauds are not limited to the medical profession and are sometimes even praised.