But, after the applause fades, after the crowds go home, after the clouds of praise and waves of criticism recede, the world of real life awaits. The world of mullahs in Tehran, Dear Leader in Pyongyang, dissolving states in Central America, jihadists with suicide vests in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan. No speech makes these unpleasant features of the real world go away.
Denizens of the real world are not impressed by how often the POTUS can apologise for presumed wrongs committed by the nation he now leads. Denizens of the real world are not swayed by appeals to allegedly great religious traditions or favorably distorted views of history. The troublemakers and bottom feeders of the real world as well as the fearful, the cowed, the psychologically crippled and stunted who support them are not and never can be deterred or defeated by words, no matter how pretty in delivery.
President Obama deserves credit for telling a couple of tough truths during the long anticipated and somewhat anticlimactic Cairo Address. It was about time that the POTUS let the government of Israel and its lobby in Washington know that there were limits to American acceptance of Israeli policy choices. It was long overdue for the POTUS to blow the whistle on Israeli actions which were contrary to both American and regional better interests.
In an identical vein it was past due for the Chief Executive to lay it on the line with the de facto governments of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (eg Hamastan and Fatahland.) If either or both are going to be recognised as the de jure governments of the Arab portion of the proposed two state solution, it is necessary that each act to stop the aggressive actions taken against Israel.
Now, Mr Obama might have gone a bit further. He might, for example, have noted that the balderdash about legitimate resistance to military occupation that is repeatedly and loudly trumpeted by the members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference is not germane to the current realities. Neither Hamastan nor Fatahland is occupied by the IDF. The attacks have been launched, not against IDF occupation troops but civilians living within the borders of pre-1967 Israel. "So", Obama might have noted, "cut the crap and accept reality as it is on the ground."
Still and all, the Nice Young Man From Chicago took a stab at telling it like it is: There is more than enough blame to go around.
Not that the words, no matter how honeyed and soft or cold and hard mattered in the slightest. The Arabs have the perpetual out (which they are already using overtime) that actions are necessary to prove the sincerity of the words. And, the Israeli government has its utterly formidable lobby to carry the water in Washington.
Schmoozing the mullahs of Tehran with the "apology" for the decision back in the Eisenhower administration to oppose the leftest takeover in Iran and put the Shah back on the Peacock Throne was both unnecessary and unbecoming. The coup way back then has been well known and well explored by historians for two generations now. It is very well understood that the decision was in the typical American model of ad hoc reaction to a perceived threat--in this case the emergence of a putatively pro-Soviet regime in a strategically critical country.
The decision may have been both short-sighted and poorly predicated in the cold light of the morning after but it was taken in good faith and with the goal of assuring stability both in Iran and the region. There was nothing about it which deserves apology.
Heck, the mea culpa is not even justifiable by purely pragmatic considerations. The exercise in abasement might have brought a momentary tingle of pleasure to the mullahs and their political frontman but nothing more. Apology will not lead to a sudden meeting of the minds on matters nuclear.
In another, slightly nausiating act of national self-flagellation, the POTUS apologised for the US having somehow lost sight of its values and traditions in the days following 9/11. To this the Geek can only slap his forehead and mutter, "Get a grip!"
The recipients of this we-were-horrible-but-we're-better-now comment include regimes and non-state actors with a record of torture, imprisonment in the most vile sort of durance, and extra-judicial murder without equal outside the "Arab and Muslim World." In countries from North Africa to Asia where the Quran reigns supreme, waterboarding and similar enhanced interrogation techniques would be rejected as entirely too soft, too mild, too lacking in pain. In these same countries, the jails do not include laptop computers, order-in meals and a tender concern for physical and emotional well-being. Nor is the sword or bullet in the neck far from hand, unrestrained by layers of judicial review, unmitigated by a long tradition of separating the winds of the political moment from the requirements of the law.
The invasion of Iraq was (in the Geek's informed estimate) a blunder of major proportions. Yet at the time and for years after it was (quietly) supported throughout the "Arab and Muslim World" at least at the governmental level.
So, Mr Obama, what's to apologise for?
The Geek has walked the beaches of Normandy. He has stood on the cliffs. Marvelled at the courage and determination of the men who came ashore, fought their way up the cliffs, winkled defenders from bunkers and trenches. Now, you have stood there too. Behind you during your quarter hour of canned history and personal stories stood men who were silent witness to the reality of the world back then--and today.
Nations defend their interests, not with apologies nor with smooth and soothing words, but with determination, courage and, when necessary, lives. Nations advance their values--such as democracy and women's rights, both of which you espoused at Cairo--not with apologies nor with smooth and soothing words, but with determination, courage, and, if all else fails, with lives.
Ultimately all diplomacy rests on the credible capacity and political will to employ force. Tehran understands this. So does Dear Leader in his Hermit Kingdom of the North. Both are betting (so far quite successfully) that the US will not be able to build a consensus within the permanent members of the Security Council to use even limited force to gain the goal of no proliferation. They are also wagering on the belief that the days of American unilateralism are over.
The words in Cairo and later in Europe at Buchenwald and Normandy have done nothing to perturb the lads in Pyongyang and the mullahs in Tehran. It has been a case of the same ole, same ole as far their ears can distinguish.
The real world demands coherent policy which is carefully and distinctly enunciated. More, it demands that the policy be followed consistently, even remorselessly. Once a decision is made, it must be stuck to over time if the goal is to be achieved. Even if this means the risk or the reality of war.
It's tough to think about. Tough to accept. But, that is the lesson of history. History also shows that policy successes have never been achieved by apologies--particularly those which are baseless.
No comments:
Post a Comment