Former Ambassador to Guatemala and Peru, John R. Hamilton, has an interesting editorial in the Washington Post. He argues that the “tolerance of other societies for being publicly judged by the United States has reached its limits.” And he details the myriad ways in which the United States acts as we act as “police officer, judge and jury of other countries’ conduct.”
Each year we issue detailed human rights reports on every country in the world, including those whose performance appears superior to our own. We judge whether other countries have provided sufficient cooperation in fighting illegal drugs. We place countries whose protection of intellectual property has been insufficient on “watch lists,” threatening trade sanctions against those that do not improve. We judge respect for labor rights abroad through a public petition process set up under the System of Generalized (trade) Preferences. We publish annual reports on other countries’ respect for religious freedom.
And more: We seek to ensure the adequacy of civil aviation oversight and the security of foreign airports through special inspections and categorizing of government performance. We ban shrimp imports from countries whose fishing fleets do not employ sea turtle extruder devices and yellowfin tuna imports where the protection of dolphins is in our view inadequate. We report on trafficking in persons and categorize the performance of every country where such trafficking is a problem, which is just about everywhere. And we withhold military education, training and materiel assistance from countries that do not enter into agreements with us to protect our nationals from the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.
Hamilton isn’t suggesting that these are unworthy goals. He merely suggests that the cumulative effect of these policies is to alienate some erstwhile allies and that we can do better working through broader international coalitions and organizations.
What he doesn’t say is that, under the Bush administration, our hypocrisy meter is off the charts and no one wants to listen to our bullshit anymore.
Well, if Hamilton had said that, he would have hit the nail on the head.
WaPo is not clueless because they are clueless. Being clueless is part of their editorial (ie. propaganda) strategy.
The Mercosur is creating an Electoral Observatory to monitor elections in the southern hemisphere, beginning with this year’s elections of Brazil and Venezuela, and next year’s elections in Argentina and Paraguay.
The President of the permanent commission, Chacho Alvarez said that it is not fair that someone else has to come to qualify our elections and that’s something we can do by our self. [Maybe they could come here for next elections to monitor the diebold machines]
Today, they are considering to decriminalize drug consumption and abortions in Argentina, which so far have tough sentences.
I do agree that some things should be monitored such as sea life catches, specially when it concerns wales, which is rampant in the southern seas. However it should be more of an international venture and not only an US initiative.
Well, if the US intends to rig elections,it can’t afford to have that detected. As is often said, one doesn’t have to commit the perfect crime – one only needs to control the investigation that follows. Elections are being monitored more closely, so it makes “sense” from a conspiratorial point of view they’d seek control of a a body that can rule an election valid or invalid, no matter the reality of the situation. They make their own reality, these neoncons… remember?
They can make their own reality as long as no one comes and can prove that they are in la-la land. Given past election thefts, a monitoring group, should be a requierment. What would the US do if it had happened in some other country?
As for the Democratic Observatory (I just love that name) it is evident that they are planning that because of Venezuela.
We are tiered of the”Do as I say, and not as I do”.
that sums up the feeling abroad perfectly.
yeah, well – we’ve got the nukes. They can just suck it up. And if they keep mouthing off we’ll just rattle our missiles and cow those rabble nations into submission. It’s our manifest destiny!
The US has lost all credibility. When we condemn Cuba as a terrorist state while supporting Israel, When Condoleeza Rice assets that “we do not torture” and calls the destruction of Lebannon “a new birth” there is no where to go. We have become a renegade nation.
As nations go, the USA is an immature youngster. Sure we are strong and hip but very narcissistic.
The whole world is watching us warily, and knows we’ve got a lot of growing up to do.
And we the people are its parents, and have been shirking our duty to control the little monster.
Bush was on the media bleating about how Iraq was not in or near civil war. All I could think was, “How the fuck would he know? He’s the last person on earth that would know anything. If he knew anything we would never have been in Iraq. Why would he even have airtime?”
I think people can accept leadership from a powerful nation as long as it is not run by the most obviously ignorant, stupid, arrogant bullies on the planet. The US no longer meets that test.
Bush knows because he once secretly flew into the heavily-protected area of the Green Zone and then quickly left. His foot touched Iraqi soil for less than 8 hours.