June 25, 2012 | 14 comments
March 14, 2012 | 37 comments
January 9, 2012 | 83 comments
January 4, 2012 | 23 comments
November 17, 2011 | 27 comments
We thought a Mideast policy could not be more confused, more feckless than Jimmy Carter’s. Now we know better.
President Obama came into office pledging a new approach to the Middle East. We were told that his middle name — Hussein — would give him unprecedented entrée to the corridors of power in that troubled region — and to the Arab street.
We thought a Mideast policy could not be more confused, more feckless than Jimmy Carter’s. Carter acceded to (if he did not welcome) the ouster of the Shah in 1979. The Shah was horrible in Carter’s eyes. Well, the Ayatollah Khomeini and his mullahs who replaced the Shah were horribler. And still are.
Mr. Obama pledged an “open hand” to the mullahs in Tehran. It was spat on.
When thousands of young Iranians massed in the streets demanding democracy, it looked like a Hope and Change rally. But this administration turned its back on them and promised to avoid “meddling” in the mullahs’ affairs.
President Obama respects Iran’s sovereignty, we were told at that time. Iran, of course, respects nobody’s sovereignty. Ask the Lebanese. Especially the Maronite Christians there.
When he went to London, Mr. Obama bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia. King Abdullah is an absolute monarch whose rule is maintained by the sword. Dissidents are beheaded — usually on Fridays after Mosque.
No Jews, no Christians are permitted in the Kingdom. But we have nonetheless had an arms-length relationship with this desert despot and his extended family.
Now, we read, that Abdullah is so upset with President Obama that he is extending feelers to Moscow and Beijing. Abdullah is afraid that the “Arab Spring” spoken of by the President may turn out to be not so much a spring season as a bed spring — ready to bounce longtime rulers right out of bed.
Egypt. President Obama made a point of going to al-Azhar Mosque to deliver his overture to what he calls “the Muslim world.” Strange, he never talks about a Christian world. Nor, in choosing Egypt as his venue, did he acknowledge the fact that one-tenth of Egyptians are Coptic Christians. They found it hard to hang on before the President of the United States referred to their country as the Muslim world.
President Mubarak seemed to be firmly in control when Mr. Obama delivered his Cairo speech. For thirty years, Hosni Mubarak had maintained a cold peace — but a peace nonetheless — with neighboring Israel. Now, in the face of massive street demonstrations orchestrated in part by the murderously anti-Israel Muslim Brotherhood, the Obama administration gave Mubarak full support, then less than full support, and finally a sharp shove off stage.
If Mubarak’s rule was horrible, we may soon find that a new alliance between an Egyptian military we fund and the Muslim Brotherhood even horribler.
What was the point of going to a nest of Muslim Brotherhood activity to deliver that 2009 Obama address if not to puff up their stature and their influence? Osama bin Laden tells us that Arabs like to go with “the strong horse.” Did Mr. Obama saddle up Mubarak or the Muslim Brotherhood as the strong horse with that Cairo speech?
President Obama delivered another Mideast speech, this one in Turkey. That nation — a member of NATO since its founding — was once viewed as the strongest U.S. ally in a region dominated by hostile Muslim regimes. Culturally Muslim but politically secular, Turkey once cooperated quietly but effectively with Israel. No more.
Prime Minister Erdogan’s government has lurched toward Islamism. Erdogan recently promoted a flotilla whose object was to break the Israeli arms embargo of Gaza.
Now, we come to the only country in the Middle East that has been a constant U.S. ally, that is the only functioning democracy, that is the only political system in the region where religious minority rights have any standing — Israel. We cannot quote any Obama speeches to the Knesset, but he recently met with Israeli President Shimon Peres in the White House. He said:
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?