A Deafening Silence

Syrian mother with her wounded son. The cost
of doing nothing

I read a commentary in the National Post earlier that sickened me. It was by Jonathon Kay and basically patted President Barrack Obama on the back for not actively intervening in Syria. The article went on to indicate that it was clear that President Obama’s ‘do nothing’ strategy was working and that eventually the Assad government would be forced to retreat to be replaced by a democracy, a Muslim theocracy or something in between.

It is unbelievable that standing by and doing nothing to intervene in the slaughter of more than 17,000 people including children can be seen as little more than good political strategy but that is what our societies have become. Life means nothing especially when it isn’t our lives being threatened. Defending the innocent has become highly selective and is based more on achieving what is politically expedient rather than on doing what is morally right.

We call that smart politics. I call it hypocrisy.

UN Peacekeepers in a time when they were permitted
to actually keep the peace

There was a time when the major democracies stood for something and led by example. It was Canada, the United States, Britain, France, Australia and dozens of other democracies like The Netherlands, Belgium, India, Portugal and Italy that participated in United Nations peace-keeping missions and when they did, they kept the peace between warring factions. Now, peace keepers do little because their hands are tied by an organization unable and unwilling to take a principled stand to protect human life. We saw that in Rwanda where the UN peace keeping force was ordered to stand back and allow the genocide of more than 100,000 men, women and children.

So ineffective and political has the UN become, it was NATO that had to intervene in the Balkans, Afghanistan and Libya.

Everything has been turned upside down and those who should be the defenders of the innocent are the observers of their slaughter. Those who should be the defenders of truth are the enablers of lies, half-truths and illusions.

Rep. Michelle Bachman

There is no greater example of how ludicrous it has become than the latest stupidity from Congresswoman Michelle Bachman of the United States. This is a woman who has achieved too much based on her looks and not enough based on an ability to actually think.

It was Michelle Bachman who, when she was running to be the GOP candidate for president, attacked Barrack Obama’s Middle East policy. It’s a valid attack. President Obama has demonstrated a remarkable inability to do anything particularly effective when it comes to foreign policy other than to make the United States look weak and confused.

Unfortunately, Ms Bachman knows even less about the world than President Obama. Her statement that the president’s handling of the Libyan situation was so dangerous that he would have the United States involved in Africa next was an embarrassment. The congresswoman did not know that Libya is in Africa and it reminded me of Sarah Palin’s famous statement that Russia was ‘over there somewhere’.

Now Ms Bachman has attacked an aide to Hillary Clinton on the basis of her heritage. 

Huma Abedin and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

Huma Abedin is a longtime aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the American-born daughter of Iranian immigrants. She is married to Rep. Anthony Weiner who is mostly famous for sharing his namesake with a number of other women. 

I’m not going to go over the absurd allegations raised by Ms Bachman. You’ve more than likely already read or heard about them and quite frankly, I think Ms Bachman is an idiot, so why waste more time on her or what she said. Suffice it to say that her allegations were baseless and were the worst form of politics at best and outright racist at worst.

But here is what I find most interesting about all of this.

The selective defender of human rights
President Barrack Obama

Where was President Obam;s defense of Ms Abedin? He was very quick to comment on the Trayvon Martin shooting but then he already knew where public opinion stood on that sad issue. For that matter, where is Hillary Clinton? Neither have shown any propensity to vigorously and publicly defend Ms Abedin.

Where was Nancy Pelosi or the Democratic Women's Caucus. Where were Democratic women in general?

It fell to Republicans to defend Ms Abedin. Republican Senator John McCain who has always put principle ahead of partisanship, stood in the Senate and defended Ms Abedin’s character and integrity. He went further and condemned the allegations by Ms Bachman as groundless and unfortunate, as did Speaker John Boehmer which caused Ms Bachman to try to back peddle on her accusations.

Ms Clinton and President Obama said little to nothing in defense of one of their own.

It raises an interesting question. Who are the real racists, those who make allegations based on fear of another’s heritage or those who refuse to defend someone who is attacked simply because of that heritage?

Republican Senator John McCain

In the bigger picture, who actually stands for something; a political leadership only defends the thousands of innocents that are slaughtered when it is politically expedient to do so or a nation that stands up to defend them whenever and wherever there is a need?

Democracy has failed the people of Syria every bit as much as President Obama and the Democratic Party have failed Huma Abedin.

Edmund Burke said, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." 

Repulican Rep. John Boehmer
Speaker of the House of Representatives

Increasingly we live in a time when our leaders do nothing except talk while the innocent are accused and even slaughtered. They are aided and supported by others who rationalize their inaction as clever strategy and good politics. We only intervene when we are left with no other option or it is safe to do so. 

It doesn’t seem to me to be the underlying principles upon which most democracies were founded but then we seem to also live in a time where there are too many with an “I’m alright Jack, too bad about you,” attitude.

It raises a simple question. If neither the United Nations nor the democracies of the world are prepared to defend the innocent everywhere, who will? 

Nobody seems to know the answer or care and I wonder how we will feel about it when it is our turn to be accused or others are trying to slaughter us while the rest of the world remains silent.

© 2012 Maggie's Bear

all rights reserved

The content of this article is the sole property of Maggie's Bear but a link to it may be shared by those who think it may be of interest to others