Remember this from Barack Obama?
The United States and the international community have been appalled and outraged by the threats, the beatings, and imprisonments of the last few days. I strongly condemn these unjust actions…I’ve made it clear that the United States respects the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and is not interfering with Iran’s affairs. But we must also bear witness…This is not about the United States or the West; this is about the people of Iran, and the future that they — and only they — will choose.
How quickly outrage dissipates. “The last few days” have stretched into more than a month of brutality and suppression, yet we’ve heard precious little from Barack Obama.
At the same time, Iranian protesters haven’t let up. During today’s Friday prayers at Tehran University “tens of thousands of government opponents” chanted, “freedom” and “death to the dictator.” They were then tear-gassed en masse by the regime’s riot police. For those who still think that “this is not a pro-West versus an anti-West competition in Iran,” as Gordon Brown said, consider this detail from today’s events:
When the hard-liners gave the traditional chant of “death to America,” Mousavi supporters countered with “death to Russia” and “death to China.”
It was a reference to Ahmadinejad’s alliance with both countries. Ahmadinejad has come under criticism in Iran for not criticizing Beijing over Muslim deaths in China’s western Xinjiang province.
Does Obama really want to form an alliance with Ahmadinejad? The Iranian people see through these cynical relationships and despise strong countries for enabling their tormenters. They aren’t afraid to stand up to Tehran and, pace Barack Obama, they’re setting the example the U.S. needs to follow.
Obama need not do anything that rises to the level of “meddling” in order to put the U.S. squarely on the side of Iran’s democrats. A new statement condemning the crackdown and calling for a second election would go a long way. The regime has lost the ability to deceive the people of Iran. This would be the very worst time to reach a “realist” arrangement with Tehran. A little outrage is in order once again.
Ben Caspit . . . predicted, just yesterday, that Barak would loose the battle.
Perhaps Contentions needs a copyeditor?
Bibi’s job isn’t easy, to be sure, but he’s probably got a couple of years to succeed or fail. To me, the immediate question is, “wither Kadima?” Will it swallow its pride and join the government? Will Tzipi survive as leader? Will Kadima even survive as a party?
Kadima has no guiding principles, so each politician currently in it will look out for #1 as in the past.
Miss T., I think all of us who post here- even us wee folk who only throw our two cents in in response to the bloggers- tend to rush our comments onto the screen. All manner of spelling and grammatical weirdness often ensues. But you’re right to make a stand for standards.
Bob, you’re right, I believe. What is Kadima that Israelis should be mindful of it? It had one big issue, the Gaza withdrawal and, I guess, the withdrawals from the West Bank that were supposed to follow if Gaza went well. Now that Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the still terror-ridden and useless PA remain who they are, it’s time for Kadima to fold.
This is not really a response to Shmuel’s post, but I think the quality of MSM reporting on Israel is exemplified by the article on the coalition agreement in today’s (3/25) Wall Street Journal, which describes Avigdor Lieberman as an “ultra-conservative nationalist” (well, nationalist is accurate) and as -get this – “anti-immigrant”! (The article starts on page A1 and carries over to page A6, where these insights can be gleaned.) Amazing.
DJF, good analysis. I’m surprised- I guess I shouldn’t be- that the WSJ blows some of the simple facts about Lieberman, sticking labels on him that can only misled a reader who knows little about Israel. Part of this problem is that you have reporters with little historical or political knowledge and they end up clumsily translating the politics of a foreign country into the terms of American politics.
#2: the immediate question is, “wither Kadima?”
“Wither” is a prophetic misprint: Kadima is likely to wither.