But I wonder if the UN and the media at large has a “concern-o-meter” to let us know the actual level of concern?
For example, there’s regular “concern”:
“I am concerned by allegations of very grave violations in the context of counter-terrorist and counter-insurgency operations,” UN human rights chief Navi Pillay told a press conference at the end of a four-day visit to Pakistan.
Or “increasing concern”:
Syria envoy Kofi Annan will appear before the United Nations General Assembly and Security Council later amid increasing concern his plan for peace in the country is doomed.
Even “mutual concern“:
French President Francois Hollande and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper expressed their concern over the situation in Syria as they met in Paris on Thursday, Hollande’s office said.
“They expressed their mutual concern over the seriousness of the situation in Syria and the need for the international community to support the mission of joint United Nations-Arab League special envoy Kofi Annan,” the Elysee Palace said in a statement.
And then ominous-sounding “serious concern“:
Abdullah Almalki wants the federal government to act on a United Nations report that calls on Canada to offer redress to him and two other Arab-Canadians tortured overseas in the aftermath of 9/11.
The UN Committee against Torture recently issued a report in which it expressed “serious concern” with the Canadian government’s refusal to offer an apology and compensation to the men.
At what level of concern does the UN actually step in to stop people from getting killed?