Obama, the Less-Than-Great Defender

President Obama's response to Iran falls squarely in the category of "pretty good" and slow to the draw. He seems to be so worried about not being George W. Bush that he's forgetting to be the American president. His expression of "deep concerns" about violence directed at peaceful protesters is weak tea. Concerns?

The alternative to being an unapologetic defender of democratic principles and process doesn't have to be a war-mongering, swaggering, preemptive bully. Or however Obama would characterize Bush. Come on, Mr. President, now is the time for eloquent men to be full-throated. Now is the time to say, sure, this is for the Iranians to work out, but the U.S. stands strong against tyranny and the suppression of free speech. Obama doesn't have to support a particular candidate, but he does have to support a particular point of view. Rather than expressing passive concern, he should actively urge the Iranian government to not use violence against peaceful demonstrators. Urge the government to respect free media and the flow of ideas. Condemn the detention of citizens whose crime has been to protest an election.

Isn't that the least we should say?

Instead, what Iranians are hearing is... not much. As Jeff Gedmin, president of Radio Free Europe, said to me on the phone today: "When we don't speak, that's also speaking." Meanwhile, Iranian human rights reporter Golnaz Esfandiari, working from Prague, has been on the phone with friends and family in Iran. She told me three things of particular interest:


The protests are not restricted to northern Tehran, as has been reported, but are taking place in several cities.

The protests were not orchestrated, as is often the case, but have been entirely spontaneous.

Iranians do not feel the moral support from the U.S. that they hope for.

They do feel that support from former Czech president Vaclav Havel, who yesterday said that Western nations should "express solidarity for those Iranians who are defending human rights."

Esfandiari today also tracked down Iranian Nobel Laureate Shirin Ebadi, who called for new elections with international observers in place to monitor results. (Here's the full interview.)

Obama's calm and reserve are among his best traits. But sometimes you get the feeling he doesn't quite believe he's president. Sometimes, as Bill Maher said, he could stand to be a little more like George W. Bush. If the planet's chief spokesman for democratic principles and human liberty is perceived as tentative, those fighting for freedom in Iran and elsewhere may be doomed.

For eight years we watched Iran march further don the road of absolute despotism.

After clearly taking another approach to this issue we now have the greatest cry for freedom we have heard from Iran in 30 years.

Your intellectual dishonesty is shameless.

Truly pathetic. Go sit down and eat your crow - you bore me.



In November of 1989, George Herbert Walker Bush famously said, "I am not going to dance on the Berlin Wall." He was wise enough to understand that, as communism was crumbling, the least productive thing an American President could do would be to stick a fork in their eye. Obama is correct to stand back and let the Iranians have their food fight. Maybe it will be the fall of Khamenei, or maybe it will only be a circus like Florida 2000. Either way, any opportunity for productive American action will come much later in the game.



Nearly all Iranians remember that the USA orchestrated the fall of the Iranian government in order to install the Shah of Iran. Advocacy for the demonstrators, on the part of the President, will cause most Iranians to rally together (probably towards the Mullahs) in response to an outside threat.



Ole Dubya would have jumped at the chance to start another war with Iran at anytime during the past 8 years.
President Obama made one speech in Cairo and now Iran is being turned upside down from within by Iranians.
hmmmmmmm



Obama correctly realizes that this would be counterproductive.

Iranians are very sensitive to foreign meddling (ironic, considering how much of it they do themselves). Preaching by the US would just galvanize support for Iran's hard right and be used to divert attention from the country's domestic issues.



"Obama's calm and reserve are among his best traits. But sometimes you get the feeling he doesn't quite believe he's president."

No, actually, Ms. Parker, I get the feeling that Mr.Obama does know he's the president.
It's you who doesn't quite believe he is.

But what I believe is that Mr. Obama's measured speech indicates a full appreciation of the impact of any words he might speak, and how they would be used against the agitators. And I also believe that you, Ms.Parker, are being intellectually dishonest, and I believe you know it. Those are the feelings--I--get.



Kathleen - don't you read anything?

Most people who have not already contributed to the mess our foreign policy was in January agree, the Iranian people must decide for themselves what they want their government to be.

You failed also to say something that is extremely important. The power behind the challenge to current Iran president is the former Iran president whose heavy hands caused the revolution that put the current guy in charge...

I agree with President Obama, it cannot have our hands involved... they got to do it for themselves and live with the consequences.



Well, judging from the posts I've read, I stand in the minority: I belive Ms. Parker's view on this subject is, intellectually and/or other, dead-on.

The United States, i.e., the President, should give full-throated support to the democratic will of peoples of any country. If we believe that we walk the walk - then we should very well talk the talk.



You're missing the point of the article. Obama doesn't have to go in guns blazing, or say anything directed towards Ahmadinejad (or Mousavi), but it is irresponisble for the President of the U.S. to say nothing.

Obama's silence on voting rights in Iran leaves his Cairo speech unfulfilled and hollow. He emphasized both the need to improve human rights in the Middle East and a desire to avoid intruding on how they govern themselves. Reiterating support for democratic process is not the equivalent of meddling in Iranian politics, which he is right to avoid.

I think he is quickly learning that when you try to stay in the middle of the road you get hit by traffic going both ways.