The Blog

Major New Appeasement Initiative Set for Monday

4:35 PM, Oct 17, 2009 • By MICHAEL GOLDFARB
Widget tooltip
Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts

Credit to the Washington Post, which reports this story with all the context necessary to demonstrate how truly cynical and pathetic this Nobel laureate-led administration is on the issue of human rights:

After lengthy debate, the Obama administration has settled on a policy toward Sudan that offers a dramatically softer approach than the president had advocated on the campaign trail -- but steers clear of the conciliatory tone advocated by his special envoy to the country.

The new U.S. policy, which will be formally unveiled Monday, calls for a campaign of "pressure and incentives" to cajole the government in Khartoum into pursuing peace in the troubled Darfur region, settling disputes with the autonomous government in southern Sudan and providing the United States greater cooperation in stemming international terrorism, according to administration officials briefed on the plan. It also provides Khartoum with a path to improved relations with the United States if it begins to address long-standing U.S. concerns.

The public rollout of the policy brings an end to months of contentious internal debate on how to confront a government headed by an indicted war crimes suspect, President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, and blamed in the deaths of more than 300,000 people in Darfur, according to U.N. estimates.

Apparently Obama boldly decided to split the difference between gold star giving special envoy Scott Gration and his ineffective and irrelevant United Nations ambassador, Susan Rice. Rice wanted to take a tough line with Sudan, perhaps as penance for her role in the Rwanda genocide -- Obama adviser Samantha Power dubbed Rice a "bystander to genocide" for her inaction as a Clinton administration NSC staffer during that conflict. Gration wanted to give the Sudanese gold stars and cookies and earlier this year unilaterally declared that the genocide in Sudan had come to an end. Gration's conduct as special envoy has been a total and unpardonable disgrace.

Jennifer Rubin points to the other regimes that have profited from the Obama administration's policy of turning a blind eye to human rights abuses by America's adversaries and enemies, but what troubles me the most is how consistently wrong this administration can be. Since Obama was sworn-in, only one anti-democratic, anti-American foreign leader has been deposed, former Honduran president Manuel Zelaya. The actions of those who removed him from power were sanctioned by the country's legislature and supreme court. Yet the Obama administration will not engage with this new Honduran government, which is being undermined and isolated by Latin America's leftist bloc.

On Sudan, Obama once had the courage of his convictions. He issued a joint statement with Senator McCain during last year's campaign declaring that the candidates stood "united and demand that the genocide and violence in Darfur be brought to an end." Joe Biden even talked of sending NATO troops to Darfur in April 2007, saying it was a "moral imperative." Now after nine months of policy reviews and infighting, we're getting a policy of "pressure and incentives." No doubt the indicted war criminal who rules Sudan is shaking in his boots at the prospect of such skillfully deployed "smart power."