Category Archives: foreign policy

Maybe

Posted on by
Reply

Maybe it’s a start. Regarding the terrorist attack on the satirical publication Charlie Hebdo in Paris that was carried out by Islamic terrorists, President Barack Obama issued this statement:

I strongly condemn the horrific shooting at the offices of Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris that has reportedly killed 12 people. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims of this terrorist attack and the people of France at this difficult time. France is America’s oldest ally, and has stood shoulder to shoulder with the United States in the fight against terrorists who threaten our shared security and the world. Time and again, the French people have stood up for the universal values that generations of our people have defended. France, and the great city of Paris where this outrageous attack took place, offer the world a timeless example that will endure well beyond the hateful vision of these killers. We are in touch with French officials and I have directed my Administration to provide any assistance needed to help bring these terrorists to justice.

Missing from this, though, is any reference to the terrorists as being Muslims or any oblique reference to that by noting that among the things those Islamic terrorists shouted during their rampage, was “We’ve avenged the honor of the prophet!” and the usual Islamic terrorist shout of “Allahu Akbar!”

Still, also missing from the statement is Obama’s usual moral equivalence temporizing by suggesting that Charlie Hebdo shouldn’t have provoked the Muslims in the first place.

Hey, it’s a new year. Maybe Obama is…changing. Condemn me for an optimist.

Separately,CharlieHebdo

Terrorists in the Courtroom

Posted on by
Reply

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said late Tuesday that the state of Palestine will join the International Criminal Court on April 1, a high-stakes move that will enable the Palestinians to pursue war-crimes charges against Israel.

That’s what the AP is reporting (I’ll elide the AP’s cynicism in referring to this organization as a “state”).

Keep in mind, which Ban seems to have chosen not to do, that the terrorist gang based in Gaza, Hamas, merged with the Palestinian Authority into a Unity Government to “govern” both Gaza and areas of the West Bank under the PA flag. Shortly after that merger, the PA last summer launched its 50-day terror war against Israel.

Now, courtesy of Ban and the UN, we’ll have terrorists in the ICC, not as the defendants they should be, but as parties whose opinions actually are taken seriously.

It’s one more reason not to take the International Court seriously.

On Empathizing with Enemies

Posted on by
Reply

Thomas Sowell had a Random Thought (not that very many of his thoughts actually are):

Hillary Clinton’s idea that we have to see the world from our adversaries’ point of view—and even “empathize” with it—is not new. Back in 1938, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain said, “I have realized vividly how Herr Hitler feels.” Ronald Reagan, however, made sure our adversaries understood how we felt. Reagan’s approach turned out a lot better than Chamberlain’s.

But Liberals think we’re insufferably arrogant to defend our own points of view. We always should subordinate ourselves to the other guy.

And this one on a different, yet sadly related, matter:

It tells us a lot about academia that the president of Smith College quickly apologized for saying, “All lives matter,” after being criticized by those who are pushing the slogan, “Black lives matter.” If science could cross breed a jellyfish with a parrot, it could create academic administrators.

Sometimes I think our Liberals are our modern-day Xanthippe, and their usefulness is limited to strengthening our own character.

Hostility

Posted on by
Reply

In an article more centered on relations between Ukraine and Russia and Ukraine’s ending of its “nonaligned” status, Nick Shchetko and Alan Cullison had this remark in noting that Ukraine’s move

drawing a quick rebuke from Moscow, which has accused the West of bringing hostile forces to its borders.

No. Moscow is…not describing accurately…the situation. The only hostile forces on Russia’s borders are Russia’s own, looking out, and Russia’s own on the outside of Russian borders, looking further out.

If Russia doesn’t want hostile forces on its borders, all it has to do is stop behaving hostilely. Full stop.

The PRC’s Misunderstanding

Posted on by
Reply

After too much hemming and hawing, the US finally got around to approving the sale of four, used, Oliver Hazard Perry class guided-missile frigates to the Republic of China. Even used, these combat ships represent a considerable boost to Chinese national security.

Naturally, the People’s Republic of China is…up in arms. The PRC’s Foreign Affairs Minister of objected, asserting that helping arm RoC

blatantly interferes in China’s domestic affairs and undermines China’s sovereignty and security interests[.]

Of course, the sale does no such thing. In fact, it enhances RoC Chinese sovereignty and security interests. It plainly doesn’t represent a threat, or any impediment, to the PRC’s national security, except in the fevered imaginations of PRC President Xi Jinping his Foreign Affairs Minister.

Unless the PRC has designs on the RoC.