Much criticism has been made as of late regarding President Obama's attitude towards the democratic crisis in Iran. Many conservative commentators have stated that Obama needs to have a more active role in the whole situation, and decry the election that took place as fraudulent.
But would Obama calling out the election for what it was really benefit U.S. interests? Surely, we should promote fair elections whenever we can, and Obama should continue monitoring the fallout in Iran. But there is a case to be made that calling out Iran and meddling in its affairs TOO much could cause more harm than good.
Suppose Obama calls current Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad a liar and a cheat -- two things that, it's pretty clear by now, the Iranian leader is. Ahmadinejad can then use those statements to rile up anti-American sentiment, gaining more favor with Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran who strongly opposes western influence of any kind. Such a move by Obama, then, could have disastrous results (and I'll bet just as much criticism).
I suspect, however, that this concern from conservatives is amplified by their overall distaste for all things Barack Obama. It seems that, ever since he took office, the right has used every excuse possible to harangue his administration.
Even someone not too familiar with politics could understand the rationale for backing off Iran temporarily; why can't the right?
No comments:
Post a Comment