Posted on 04/01/2003 7:06:09 PM PST by Utah Girl
Peter Arnett
Bravo to NBC for sacking Peter Arnett. One footnote to this controversy: In his paean to Iraq’s “resistance” and “determination,” Arnett made a claim that you often hear even from uncompromised reporters – that the U.S. forces had been forced to change their plans. I have no idea whether this claim is true. Personally I doubt it. But even if it were true – so what?
There are doomsters and defeatists out there who keep insisting that the U.S. and its allies can only claim victory if they meet an ever-lengthening list of conditions:
“The allies win ONLY IF they (1) overthrow the Saddam Hussein regime and (2) find Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and (3) do so with minimal casualties and (4) also with minimal Iraqi casualties while (5) being hailed and welcomed by the Iraqi population and (6) without upsetting Arab public opinion too much also (7) without irritating the European allies too much and now (8) without any alterations of their original plan.” In other words, allied success can be discounted if along the way the allies make any adjustment of their plans to circumstances.
If we accepted this remarkable principle, we would have to conclude that though the Allies appear to have defeated Germany and Japan reasonably decisively, they actually lost World War II on points.
Pro-American in Ottawa
A Washington, D.C. reader writes:
“I was visiting my cousin in Montreal this past weekend, and on what could best be described as a whim, we decided to drive to Ottawa to check out the capitol (or is it 'capital' in Canada?). To my delighted surprise, we were upon our arrival greeted in the streets with a substantial number of American flags, all heading toward Parliament. Wondering what was going on, we parked and decided to check out the proceedings.
“I could not believe the sight that unfolded before my eyes. There I was, standing on foreign soil, in front of the Canadian Parliament, and thousands (maybe two or three thousand) of Canadians were chanting 'USA...USA...USA.' The speeches were excellent, and the crowd was extremely motivated, despite the dreary weather.
“Up to that point, I had (perhaps ignorantly) maintained a rather negative view of the Canadians, but this rally truly inspired me. These people were ashamed of their government that turned its back on its best friend, and they wanted to let the world know it. The latest polling data show they are not alone.
“I've been to pro-American rallies in DC (including the rather disappointing one at the Lincoln Memorial a couple weeks ago) and Missouri, but I'd never felt the same kind of pride that I felt in Canada this past weekend. I'll now make sure I spread the word among my friends and colleagues that it's not Canada that opposes us ... it’s just her government.”
Land of the Free
Yesterday, in the midst of war and under the threat of terrorist attack, the Government of the United States released its annual report on the state of human rights around the world.
The report does not merely monitor human rights abroad. It is also a monitor of the integrity of the U.S. government itself – one question that readers always bring to the report is whether the State Department will bring itself to speak frankly about American allies and clients.
This year’s report does credit to its authors. It is candid about states like Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, and, yes, Israel.
Human-rights concerns are seldom of course the sum and total of American interest in a foreign state. I don’t think too many Americans regret that Uzbekistan restricts the freedom of Islamic radicals to hold public meetings. Most of us are probably prepared to make allowances for Israel’s rough prison conditions too – as the state’s economy weakens under unremitting terrorist attack, funds for prison amenities are naturally going to be scarce.
Nor do we expect the U.S. government to conduct its foreign policy, as Jimmy Carter once dreamily suggested it might, solely on the basis of human rights. France, for example, is a full and liberal democracy – and also an often unfriendly state. Qatar is an authoritarian sheikdom – but nevertheless the United States still needs Qatar’s goodwill.
Still, facts are facts – and publicity lends power to facts. The reports on the Central Asian republics make clear that global scrutiny of their human-rights record has put pressure on those governments to curb their abuses. The report also underscores America’s own commitment to promote democracy and liberty worldwide, to the extent practical – to make America’s principles and beliefs a living creed, not something Americans store in a cupboard to salute only on special occasions.
Democracy, as critics of the president’s Iraq policy rightly say, is not something that can be imposed from outside. But it’s equally true that democracy often cannot establish itself without foreign concern and help. Tyranny can be simultaneously very unpopular – and very strong.
If American power had not been called to war to defeat, tyranny would have conquered the world in the 20th century – and would still rule it now. John Quincy Adams’ famous line that America is the “well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all,” but the “champion and vindicator only of her own” is simply false as a matter of fact. From Korea to Kuwait, American power has championed the freedom and independence of the whole planet; from Moscow to Montevideo, American influence has vindictated the human rights of individuals. I am glad to live in a world where liberty is supported by the strength of the strongest power of them all. Aren’t you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.