Ilya Somin’s two recent Volokh Conspiracy posts on secession led me to reread a similar one of my own from several years ago, Secession, Then And Now, which began as follows:
In a remarkable OpEd in the Washington Post yesterday, Anne Applebaum lambasted “The Freedom Haters,” by which she meant
a part of the Western left — or rather the Western far left — [that] is now so anti-American, or so anti-Bush, that it actually prefers authoritarian or totalitarian leaders to any government that would be friendly to the United States. Many of the same people who found it hard to say anything bad about Saddam Hussein find it equally difficult to say anything nice about pro-democracy demonstrators in Ukraine. Many of the same people who would refuse to condemn a dictator who is anti-American cannot bring themselves to admire democrats who admire, or at least don’t hate, the United States.
The Obama administration’s recent responses to some democratic movements abroad raises the question of whether some of those “Western far left” views have found a new home in the the White House. Consider:
• From Spencer Ackerman’s interview with Iranian dissident Akbar Ganji, “one of the leading Iranian dissidents and most prominent voices in the international community for a more liberal Iran”:
“[Obama] cannot stay silent on human rights issues.” Clearly, Ganji thinks the Obama administration isn’t striking the right balance between non-intervention and humanitarian concerns.
• From Key Iranian Dissident Riled at Obama’s Approach:
A key Iranian dissident tells Newsmax he was stunned when he heard President Barack Obama tell reporters that, despite government’s brutal crackdown in Tehran, the Islamic Republic has time to regain “legitimacy” in the eyes of the Iranian people.
“I was hoping President Obama would lead the world and start a boycott of Iranian oil,” said former presidential candidate and opposition activist Mohsen Sazegara. “This is the best way to save the lives of the Iranian people.”
Instead, Sazegara told Newsmax, he listened to Obama’s news conference on Tuesday with a sense of disbelief….
Sazegara, who was involved in the reform movement in the 1990s but eventually left Iran after the reformist government jailed him, said he listened to Obama with a sense of “deep, deep, deep regret. I never expected President Obama to say something like that.”
• From Report: U.S. to block Iran sanctions at G8 summit:
The United States is opposed to enacting a new set of financial sanctions against Iran that are due to be discussed in the G8 summit next week, diplomatic officials in New York reported Friday…. [D]iplomatic sources in New York reported that American officials are working behind the scenes to prevent new sanctions from being imposed against Iran….
In addition to U.S. reluctance to enact fresh sanctions, G8 members Russia and China have been known to oppose any punitive steps against Tehran.
• And closer to home: Honduran Democracy Protesters Bash Obama & CNN
• Roger Simon asks: Iran, Honduras: Is Obama “objectively pro-fascist”?
I think Eugene Volokh, quoting George Orwell, raises strong objections to the “objectively pro-fascist” accusation, but I also think that what is at the very least Obama’s coolness to the forces fighting repression around the world is both disappointing and disturbing. It’s almost as though he prefers despots to their democratic opponents so that he can have the opportunity to display his own talents in dealing with them.
Who knew that when Obama campaigned on the theme of changing America’s image in the world he would do so by turning a cold shoulder to movements fighting repression in order to court access to, and the good opinion of, their oppressors?
Change you can believe in….
Hi John-
I oppose the Obama administration as much as any patriotic American, and I agree there’s something to people on the left glorifying anti-American figures in the narcissistic belief that Chavez and whoever share their commitment to transcendent global social justice, but I’ve gotta say that I think the administration acted prudently with regard to Iran. Anything the U.S. would have done would simply have made it easier for the Iranian leadership to identify the protestors with the Great Satan. I think those of us on the right can claim some easy points criticizing Obama on this one, but at the long term cost of eroding our credibility beyond its current abysmal levels.
I just wish our dear leader would stop meddling in Honduras…
Anything the U.S. would have done would simply have made it easier for the Iranian leadership to identify the protestors with the Great Satan.
I disagree (but then you already knew that). My point was not that Obama should “done” more, but that he should have said>/i> more. He should have identified the United States clearly with the aspirations and the behavior of the anti-government protestors, much as Reagan did with the Solidarity protest in Poland when it was still a protest movement. Most emphatically, he should NOT have said Ahmadinejad and Mousavi were about the same and that the current government can gain “legitimacy” by being a bit nicer.
These may be “just words,” but recall Obama’s campaign derision aimed at those who said his words were “just words.”
Nor do I think that saying these true and necessary things would have made it any easier for the Iranian govt to blame the U.S. for its troubles. It can, and does, do that all the time without any rhetorical fodder from us.
In any event, if I were an Iranian or Honduran democrat I know I would be dispirited by Obama’s lack of rhetorical support, by his lagging behind even the Europeans in aligning his country with democratic forces.