Although President Obama's address to the nation served its main purpose"”articulating the national-security rationale for the use of force in Afghanistan"”there was one unfortunate disconnect. Obama did not link his powerful rhetoric about America as a unique global power that believes "right makes might" to his argument for the surge in troops. The moral imperative for defeating the Taliban and its heinous ideology went unmentioned.
America has both an indispensable role in protecting the world from Al Qaeda and a noble purpose that should be stated aloud: to defeat the Islamist extremists whose barbarism has done such damage to innocent Afghans and Pakistanis alike. Preventing the return to power of a Taliban regime that terrorized its own people and allowed Osama bin Laden to orchestrate the 9/11 attacks on America is a mission of which our troops and our country can be proud.
Obama's omission of the moral dimension reflects a larger trend. Over the past year, as the main contours of the new administration's foreign policy have been established, the principles of democratic values have been too often set aside. Big changes were surely needed to recover from the damage wrought by the Bush administration. And those crucial changes in substance and style"”on global warming, Guantánamo and treatment of prisoners, respect for international law, cancellation of unnecessary missile defenses in Eastern Europe"”have won back lost support and admiration for the United States among friends and allies. Washington has succeeded in restoring the international partnerships necessary to confront complex global challenges. But by putting a premium on listening, not lecturing, and by injecting a corrective dose of pragmatism, an impression has been left that America's historic support for the spread of democratic values has diminished.
Certainly, the Bush presidency bequeathed to Obama a weakened and scorned America. But in righting the listing ship of state, our support for democratic values, long associated with the Democratic Party, must not be thrown overboard. Steering the right course between principle and pragmatism is no easy challenge. But at least since President John F. Kennedy's call on Americans to bear any burden in the pursuit of freedom, Democrats from Carter to Clinton have tried.
A good example is China. Not so long ago, a Democratic Congress voted to revoke most-favored-nation trading status for China primarily because of rampant human-rights abuses. The first President Bush vetoed that bill, which was one reason his administration was labeled "realist." When President Clinton took office, he didn't link trade with China to human rights"”much to the chagrin of the current speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi"”but he did make Chinese human-rights practices a prime topic of discussion even as Beijing was brought into the World Trade Organization and bilateral relations were improved. Indeed, when speaking uncensored to the Chinese people on his visit there, he declared the communist government to be on the "wrong side of history."
The second President Bush elevated democratic values and human rights to an even higher plane. Not only did he make the building of democracy in the Middle East his after-the-fact justification for the invasion of Iraq, but his second Inaugural Address also declared the pursuit of freedom and democracy as the main mission of the United States abroad. Of course, his strategy of democracy-by-invasion soon foundered in the chaos of an Iraqi civil war. Democracy promotion was then further discredited by Bush's insistence on elections in the Palestinian territories"”over the objections of both the Israeli and Palestinian governments"”which led to a victory for the terrorist group Hamas and a huge new obstacle to peace in the Middle East.
At home, the cause of democracy became a partisan struggle too. It is worth recalling that at the height of their hubris, Republican legislators waved purple fingers (signaling Iraq's free elections) in the face of Democratic members who had legitimate doubts about the wisdom of Bush's war policy. Along with the huge sacrifices in blood, treasure, and respect associated with the Iraq debacle, that State of the Union spectacle is surely one reason many Democrats no longer see the cause of pursuing freedom abroad the same way. Ironically, despite the fact that President Clinton won substantial international praise for his moral intervention to save 1 million Kosovar Albanians from slaughter, somehow being called a Nixonian realist is a compliment in Democrat-dominated Washington these days.
See how well you can see Sarah from your house, by taking our trivia quiz.
Why there could be a silver lining in a failed climate treaty.
This season's top i-Phone add-ons.
A NEWSWEEK journalist recounts his captivity in Iran.
You need to learn how the Senate works (or doesn't, if the Repubs continue as they have been).
This article claims Obama is restoring our standing in the world. In many respects he is seen as weak by most of the worlds leaders. We are seeing open difiance of our "diplomatic efforts" in Iran, North Korea and in south America. Russia couldn't care less about what we think, and China is admonishing our financial moves. Obama has taken less than a year in office to bring ridicule on us, while spending us into oblivion, growing government, and eating away at personal freedoms. Change is the only campaign promise he has kept, most of it being bad.
There is a time and place for everything, though at times it may seen that we have forgotten our democracy values, we need to get our position within the world stable first before we start charging after issues in other countries for them to clean up their house. We have several issues that we are dealing with at the moment and getting them addressed, like jobs, our excessive debt and dealing with two wars. During the times when other presidents were able to stand on the "bully" pulpit and declare righteous behaviors to be conducted by others, we as a country was not as exposed as we are to day. The best example we can offer currently for what Democracy stands for is by demonstration internally as to how it works and how successful it can be. We have demonstrate the value of Democracy in the past presidential election by changing the direction we were heading, the public acknowledged that we needed a change and the process that was used demonstrate that democracy does work. I would like to complement all the contributors that supplied feedback on this topic. This has been the most respectful debate of views I have seen in some time. We all have our opinions and have shared them without attacking each other or resorting for 4 letter expletives. Debate is good and isn't that part of the democracy that we need to project into the world.
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
Customize the NEWSWEEK homepage to feature your favorite columnists.
Read Full Article »