Iran to the UN Human Rights Council?!

You think the UN can’t become more of a farce? You think the Obami can’t look any sillier for showing deference to the three-ring circus, most particularly the UN Human Rights Council? Think again. Claudia Rosett tells us:

While Iran’s regime bloodies its dissidents, the nuclear weapons-loving mullahs are seeking a treat for themselves at the United Nations: Iran is running for a seat on the UN Human Rights Council. Utterly perverse though it would be, Iran might snag that prize. The 47 seats on the Geneva-based Human Rights Council are parceled out among regional groups of UN member states. This year the Asian bloc has four seats opening up. Five contenders have stepped forward: Malaysia, Maldives, Qatar, Thailand—and Iran.

Why, how special that would be! As Rosett observes, “If Iran’s government wins a seat on this council, it would send a horrifying message to Iranian dissidents. They have been enduring mass arrests, beatings and murders in their quest for genuine human rights inside Iran.” And one can only imagine the new stream of Israel-bashing and anti-American venom that would spew forth should Tehran capture a seat.

0
Shares
Google+ Print

Iran to the UN Human Rights Council?!

Must-Reads from Magazine

Defending Trump’s Tweets Backfires

Is it really worth it?

When it comes to foreign affairs, Donald Trump has not governed as he campaigned. So far, he has largely abandoned radical populist isolationism and protectionism in favor of conventionally hawkish tweaks on the status quo, abandoning ideology in favor of consistency. Doing so, he’s had a relatively successful run. For this White House, cautious but positive verdicts on the Trump administration’s conduct just don’t cut it. Trump must be a transformative figure, incapable of miscalculation or imprudence; he says so himself, after all. Trump cannot have mere successes, and they most certainly cannot be unexpected or the result of a concession to critics. This president’s image must be burnished at every turn, even if that means besmirching the legacies of Trump’s Republican predecessors.

4
Shares
Google+ Print

The U.S. Must Show Iranians That They Can’t Have It All

Not a hard choice.

The fact that Iran’s anti-regime protests appear to have died down is not a reason to relax the pressure on Tehran. On the contrary, it’s a reason to increase it through serious sanctions on Iran’s ballistic missile program as well as its support for terror and regional aggression. The protests will only become a truly mass movement if enough Iranians come to realize what the protesters already have: Contrary to the promise held out by the nuclear deal, Iran can’t have it all. Terror and military aggression are incompatible with a thriving economy.

7
Shares
Google+ Print

Should Professors Go Public?

Reality and self-delusion.

Over at the Chronicle of Higher Education, Leonard Cassuto argues  that academics “need to go public.” That’s an extension of the reasoning behind his 2015 book, The Graduate School Mess, in which he questions the strange notion that advanced education in the humanities exists to produce unread journal articles.

5
Shares
Google+ Print

The DACA Compromise May Be Dead on Arrival

Bipartisanship really isn't popular.

Americans love it when politicians in Washington strike bipartisan deals that make everyone happy. At least, in theory. If that were true in practice, there would be many more bipartisan deals. Political realities ensure that compromise is almost always a fraught prospect. The temptation to eschew concession and consolation in order to court the uncompromising maximalists who hold sway over both party’s base voters is often too great to resist. The illusory consensus around a White House-backed proposal to pursue modest immigration reform is illustrative of this sorry state of affairs. The plan proposed by the Trump White House last week would make everyone happy. It’s a perfect middle ground. That’s precisely why it’s doomed.

12
Shares
Google+ Print

Confusing the Profane for Sacred

Contempt, not compassion.

Befitting our post-literate political age, in which the American president and his courtiers actively deride expertise and activists across the political spectrum reject thoughtfulness in favor of ornery truculence, Donald Trump’s style of reasonably communicative grumbles seems to be supplanting more formal forms of language. The all-consuming presidential cult has now sunk its hooks into the American Dialect Society. The nearly 130-year-old organization of linguists, lexicographers,  and grammarians revealed that 2017’s “word of the year” was “fake news,” a label the president applies to anything of which he disapproves—demonstrable or dubious—that finds its way into a journalist’s copy. But ADS saved a saucier “word of the year” for the internet crowd, and it far better exemplifies the rapid deterioration of the national discourse.

25
Shares
Google+ Print