Natan Scharansky wonders where American moral confidence went. That's another two sided question. For America to act abroad with confidence there must be consensus on both sides on what is right and what is wrong. Like 1974 to 1980 or 1800 to 1815 or 1835 to 1860 for that matter, the US lacks consensus.
I am afraid that the real reason for the U.S. stance is not its assessment, however incorrect, of the two sides’ respective interests but rather a tragic loss of moral self-confidence. While negotiating with the Soviet Union, U.S. administrations of all stripes felt certain of the moral superiority of their political system over the Soviet one. They felt they were speaking in the name of their people and the free world as a whole, while the leaders of the Soviet regime could speak for no one but themselves and the declining number of true believers still loyal to their ideology. But in today’s postmodern world, when asserting the superiority of liberal democracy over other regimes seems like the quaint relic of a colonialist past, even the United States appears to have lost the courage of its convictions. We have yet to see the full consequences of this moral diffidence, but one thing is clear: The loss of America’s self-assured global leadership threatens not only the United States and Israel but also the people of Iran and a growing number of others living under Tehran’s increasingly emboldened rule. Although the hour is growing late, there is still time to change course — before the effects grow more catastrophic still.
In those earlier crises the South was certain and the North conflicted. Now the right is (fairly) certain but the left is wondering if racist, sexist, homesexuality fearing Amerika isn't by definition "wrong".
No comments:
Post a Comment