Imagine some dictator (Castro, Chavez, Ahmadinejad, whoever) held a press conference and said he was really, really sorry and he was going to make nice with us from now on . . . what would conservatives say? We’d say “words mean nothing” or “OK, let’s see some actions to back it up,” or we’d trot out possibly the worlds greatest rhetorical non-sequitor: “Trust but verify.” So why should we get all upset over Obama apologizing or bowing or whatever the outrage-de-jour is?
Diplomatic words don’t mean too much. Is Obama doing a good job with all these diplomatic meetings? Maybe not but I have some trouble with the reactions of even some of my favorite blogs:
- There’s Obama was a miserable failure at the “Summit of the Americas” by Sistah Toldjah
- There’s Hot Air’s criticism of Obama for accepting a book from Chavez
- Just One Minute has the best post name: The Latin Variation Of The Jihadist Fist Bump
Obama’s soft words and gestures may presage weaker policy, but maybe not. When push came to shove, Obama OK’d the shooting of the Somali pirates, he is pushing a surge into Afghanistan and, very encouragingly, Obama has pulled the US out of the United Nations Global Conference on racism.
This is the kind of multi-national boondoggle with a politically correct name that is supposed to attract liberals like you know what draws flies, but Obama correctly identified it as a hypocritical exercise devoted to criticizing Israel and pulled the US out. This is exactly the kind of thing conservatives should be cheering for and something that, had a Republican done it, would have brewed a storm of criticism from the left.
Attacking the form, rather than the function, of Obama’s foreign policy is mis-placed focus and plays into the hands of those who want to characterize conservative commentary on Obama as petty and small minded, however technically accurate it might be. It also ignores “credit where credit is due” moments of Obama-Clinton foreign policy which we should be encouraging.
Update: There’s another post on Hot Air now Should we scold Obama for shaking Chavez’ hand? Both the posts and the comments were interesting. Several commenters seemed upset that Obama didn’t somehow debate Chavez and Ortega though there was one humorous rebuttal: a link to Explain again to me why this is a scandal? which shows prominent Republicans shaking hands with assorted commie dictators.
I have two comments on all this:
- Arguing with some Castro-wanna-be is putting him on your level. The biggest snub you can give Ortega and Chavez is to treat them like kids throwing a tantrum: pat their little heads and then ignore them. Bush, in one of his under-appreciated foreign policy decisions, understood this and purposely avoided escalating rhetoric with these guys. Obama is wise to do the same.
- Shaking hands with Hitler wasn’t appeasement: giving in on the Sudetenland was. Try to think of something worth less than a politician’s handshake and smile: if you can you’ve got a bigger imagination than I do. Again, maybe there was a rookie tactical error but not one I’m concerned with in the big picture and certainly not one that deserves this much virtual ink while so much else is going on.
{ 1 trackback }
{ 0 comments… add one now }