Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Today let us be clear: Barack Obama was lying about US support for democracy in the Middle East

The only reason Barack Obama's mention of Tunisia in his state of the union address was not disgusting is because it was exactly what he's proven that we can expect from him and from the United States regarding the Middle East. I've and I expect most observers of the region have become desensitized to US hypocrisy and the racist US proposition that democratic representation and accountability of government to the governed for hundreds of millions of people in the region is a reasonable and acceptable sacrifice for the strategic security of the Zionist project.

So here we have Obama on Tunisia:
And we saw that same desire to be free in Tunisia, where the will of the people proved more powerful than the writ of a dictator. And tonight, let us be clear: The United States of America stands with the people of Tunisia, and supports the democratic aspirations of all people. (Applause.)
The place to start looking at this brazen claim of Obama's that the US supports the democratic aspirations of all people is Obama's 2009 refusal to describe Mubarak as authoritarian or to say anything about his government other than that he appreciates that he maintains peace with Israel.
Justin Webb: You're making this speech in Cairo. Amnesty International says there are thousands of political prisoners in Egypt. How do you address that issue?

President Obama: Right. Well, look - obviously, in the Middle East, across a wide range of types of governments, there are some human rights issues. I don't think there's any dispute about that. The message I hope to deliver is that democracy, rule of law, freedom of speech, freedom of religion - those are not simply principles of the west to be hoisted on these countries.

But, rather what I believe to be universal principles that they can embrace and affirm as part of their national identity, the danger, I think, is when the United States, or any country, thinks that we can simply impose these values on another country with a different history and a different culture.

And I think the thing that we can do, most importantly, is serve as a good role model. And that's why, for example, closing Guantanamo, from my perspective, as difficult as it is, is important.

Because part of what we want to affirm to the world is that these are values that are important, even when it's hard. Maybe especially when it's hard. And not just when it's easy.

Justin Webb: Do you regard President Mubarak as an authoritarian ruler?

President Obama: No, I tend not to use labels for folks. I haven't met him. I've spoken to him on the phone.

He has been a stalwart ally in many respects, to the United States. He has sustained peace with Israel, which is a very difficult thing to do in that region.

But he has never resorted to, you know, unnecessary demagoging of the issue, and has tried to maintain that relationship. So I think he has been a force for stability. And good in the region. Obviously, there have been criticisms of the manner in which politics operates in Egypt.

And, as I said before, the United States' job is not to lecture, but to encourage, to lift up what we consider to be the values that ultimately will work - not just for our country, but for the aspirations of a lot of people.
"There are some human rights issues." "There have been criticisms of the manner in which politics operates." Obama doesn't give any other reason for offering the mildest possible criticism of Egypt, which by any objective standard is more brutal, repressive and undemocratic than Iran, than that it sustains peace with Israel.

Sustaining peace with Israel is more important than democracy to Barack Obama. If he can only have one, it is clear that he chooses the ability of about six million Jewish people in Palestine to have an ethnic majority state over the ability of seventy million Egyptians to have a government accountable to them.

For another look at the words of the Obama administration, let's quickly look at Hillary Clinton's response to the protests in Egypt.
Our assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable and is looking for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people.
Obama brazenly lies and says the US supports the democratic aspirations of all people when he supports the democratic aspirations of people on the condition that they sustain peace with Israel. Hillary Clinton, more subtly has taken for the United States and for herself the right to determine which needs and interests of the Egyptian people are "legitimate" and declares that Mubarak is "looking for ways" to respond to only to Egypt's legitimate needs and interests.

1 comment:

lidia said...

you are right, of course, but it is more than only Israel

See for ex. "Asked about the return of Duvalier, who had thousands tortured and murdered
under his dictatorship, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said, "this is
a matter for the Government of Haiti and the people of Haiti."

But when asked about Aristide returning, he said, "Haiti does not need, at this
point, any more burdens.""