[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
World News See other World News Articles Title: Too Many Foreign Policy Double Standards Hurt U.S. Credibility The hypocrisy is especially evident in Washington's approach to Saudi Arabia and other Middle East 'allies.' President Donald Trump poses for photos with ceremonial swordsmen on his arrival to Murabba Palace, as the guest of King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud of Saudi Arabia, Saturday evening, May 20, 2017, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead) American leaders like to portray the United States as an exemplar of ethical conduct in the international system. The reality is far different, and it has been for decades. Throughout the Cold War, the United States embraced extremely repressive rulers, including the Shah of Iran, Nicaraguas Somoza family, Taiwans Chiang Kai-shek, and Egypts Hosni Mubarak, all the while portraying them as noble members of the Free World. Such blatant hypocrisy and double standards continue today regarding both Washingtons own dubious behavior and the U.S. attitude toward the behavior of favored allies and friends. The gap between professed values and actual policy is especially evident in the Middle East. U.S. officials routinely excoriate Syria and Iran, not only for their external behavior, but for manifestations of domestic abuse and repression. Some of those criticisms are valid. Both Bashar al-Assads regime and Irans clerical government are guilty of serious international misconduct and human-rights violations. But the credibility of Washingtons expressions of outrage is vitiated when those same officials remain silent, or even excuse, equally seriousand in some cases, more egregiousabuses that the United States and its allies commit. Following the Syrian regimes alleged use of chemical weapons in early April, President Trump painted Assad as an exceptionally vile enemy. He immediately issued a tweet describing the Syrian leader as an animal who gassed his own people. In his subsequent address to the American people announcing punitive air and missile strikes, Trump charged that the incident confirmed a pattern of chemical weapons use by that very terrible regime. The evil and despicable attack left mothers and fathers, infants and children thrashing in pain and gasping for air. These are not the actions of a man. They are crimes of a monster instead. The president also blasted Russia and Iran for their longstanding sponsorship of Assad. To Iran and to Russia, I ask: What kind of a nation wants to be associated with the mass murder of innocent men, women and children? TACs Daniel Larison provided an apt response to that question. Trump should know the answer, since he just hosted one of the chief architects of the war on Yemen that the U.S. has backed to the hilt for the last three years. Britain welcomed the Saudi crown prince earlier on, and France just hosted him in the last few days. All three have been arming and supporting the Saudis and their allies in Yemen no matter how many atrocities they commit. Indeed, the United States has been an outright accomplice in those atrocities, which among other tragic effects, has led to a cholera epidemic in Yemen. The U.S. military refuels Saudi coalition warplanes and provides intelligence to assist them in their attacks on Yemenattacks that have exhibited total indifference about civilian casualties. A recent revelation implicates Washington in even more atrocious conduct. Evidence has emerged that Saudi forces have employed white phosphorous munitions, and that the United States supplied those foul weapons that inflict horrible burns on their victims. For U.S. leaders to criticize Syria for using chemical weapons in light of such behavior may reach a new level of hypocrisy. Washingtons double standard also is evident regarding the international conduct of another U.S. ally: Turkey. U.S. officials reacted with a vitriolic denunciation of Russias annexation of Crimea, but the reaction wasand remainsvery different regarding Ankaras invasion of Cyprus in 1974 and the occupation of that countrys northern territory. Washingtons criticism was tepid even at the beginning, and it has become more so with the passage of time. Indeed, there is greater U.S. pressure on the government of Cyprus to accept a peace settlement that would recognize the legitimacy of the puppet Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus that Ankara established (and has populated with settlers from the Turkish mainland) and countenance the continued presence of Turkish troops. Although the United States initially imposed mild sanctions on Turkey for invading and occupying its neighbor, they were soon lifted. Sanctions imposed against Russia are stronger, and there is little prospect that they will be lifted, or even eased, in the foreseeable future. Washingtons criticism of Turkeys repeated military incursions into northern Iraq and northern Syria likewise have been barely audible. That has been the case even though the targets in Syria are Kurdish forces that aided the United States and its allies in their war against ISIS. The flagrant U.S. double standard also is apparent in the disparate assessments of the domestic conduct of Iran and such U.S. allies as Egypt and Saudi Arabia. UN Ambassador Nikki Haley verbally eviscerates Tehran at every opportunity for repressing its population. When anti-government demonstrations erupted in several Iranian cities earlier this year, Haley was quick to embrace their cause. The Iranian regimes contempt for the rights of its people has been widely documented for many years, she stated during a Security Council session. Haley added that the United States stood unapologetically with those in Iran who seek freedom for themselves, prosperity for their families, and dignity for their nation. Iran certainly does not resemble a Western-style democracy, but its political system is vastly more open than either Egypts or Saudi Arabias. Although the clerical Guardian Council excludes any candidate for office that it deems unacceptable, competing elections take place between individuals with often sharply contrasting views. President Hassan Rouhani won a new electoral mandate over a decidedly more hardline opponent in the May 2017 presidential election. Compared to some U.S. allies in the Middle East, Iran resembles a Jeffersonian democracy. The Saudi royal family does not tolerate even a hint of domestic opposition. People have been imprisoned or beheaded merely for daring to criticize the regime. Saudi Arabias overall human-rights record is easily one of the worst in the world, as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have documented. It is a measure of just how stifling the system is that the government finally allowing women to drive is considered a radical reform. A similar suffocating miasma of repression exists in Egypt, where President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has imprisoned thousands of political opponents, executed hundreds, and wins rigged elections by absurd margins reminiscent of those in Soviet satellite countries during the Cold War. Yet, President Trump and other U.S. officials express little criticism of those brutal, autocratic allies. Trumps demeanor during his state visit to Riyadh last year bordered on fawning. Washington approves multi-billion-dollar arms deals for both Saudi Arabia and Egypt, despite their legendary human-rights abuses. As noted, the United States even continues to assist Saudi Arabia in its atrocity-ridden military intervention in Yemen. There may be plausible geo-strategic reasons for persisting in such double standards. Iran, for example, has been openly hostile to the United States and its policy objectives since the fall of the Shah. It is not illogical for Washington to be intent on countering the influence of Tehran and its Syrian ally, even if that requires making common cause with other repressive regimes in the region. But U.S. leaders need to be candid with the American people and acknowledge that their decisions are based on cold calculations of national interest, not ethical considerations. They should at least spare us their pontificating and the pretense that they care about the rights or welfare of Middle Eastern populations. Washingtons policies indicate otherwise. Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow in defense and foreign policy at the Cato Institute and a contributing editor at The American Conservative, is the author or coauthor of 10 books on international affairs, including Perilous Partners: The Benefits and Pitfalls of Americas Alliances with Authoritarian Regime. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top Page Up Full Thread Page Down Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Ada (#0)
Tell that to the victims of the 1979 hostage crisis in Tehran at the U.S. Embassy. Jeffersonian democracy my left foot. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
These days D.C. policies are foreign to American values ... fuck Iran !
Ephesians 5:11King James Version (KJV) 11 "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. " It's not terrorism when Amerika does it.
So Chiang Kai-shek is a bad guy now? Boy, with friends like American Conservative who needs enemies.
_____________________________________________________________ USA! USA! USA! Bringing you democracy, or else! there were strains of VD that were incurable, and they were first found in the Philippines and then transmitted to the Korean working girls via US military. The 'incurables' we were told were first taken back to a military hospital in the Philippines to quietly die. 4um
Get with the program. When chiang kai-shek, who fought the Japanese for four years before Pearl Harbor, began losing to Maos Communists, we did not blame ourselves for being a faithless ally, we blamed him. He was incompetent; he was corrupt.
I hope you're being facetious. Commiepedia's article on him fairly glows with righteousness.
_____________________________________________________________ USA! USA! USA! Bringing you democracy, or else! there were strains of VD that were incurable, and they were first found in the Philippines and then transmitted to the Korean working girls via US military. The 'incurables' we were told were first taken back to a military hospital in the Philippines to quietly die. 4um
Tossing our friendly dictators under the bus when things so south is what we do, my dear. Nothing is ever our fault.
|
||
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|