Kenyan President should be “squirming”, says country’s political analyst

Since we're quoting articles here's one from Helen Cooper

" “Behind closed doors, most Iranian officials have long recognized that the ‘death to America’ culture of 1979 is bankrupt, and that Iran will never achieve its enormous potential as long as relations with the United States remain adversarial,” said Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He and others argue that many Iranian pragmatists and moderates believe that their country in 2009 is facing a now-or-never moment.

“If Tehran’s hardliners are incapable of making nice with an American president named Barack Hussein Obama who preaches mutual respect and wishes them a happy Nowruz, it’s pretty obvious the problem is in Tehran, not Washington,” Mr. Sadjadpour said.

During the Bush years, Iran’s regime was able to coalesce support by uniting the country against a common enemy: President Bush, who called Iran a pillar of the “axis of evil” in a speech that alienated many of the very reformers whom the United States was trying to woo. For much of his administration, even as he strengthened Iran by toppling Iran’s nemesis Saddam Hussein, Mr. Bush struck a confrontational public line against the Iranian regime.

The result, according to many experts here and in Iran, was that Iranians, including reformers, swallowed their criticism of the hard-line regime and united against the common enemy. Iranians with reformist sympathies even began advising Americans to stop openly supporting them, lest that open them to attack as pawns of America."

I found this particular comment as similar to another he made on this same thread, when he wrote of President Obama, "His supporters make excuses for him when he meddles and when he does not meddle. Hope and Change depending on the circumstances I guess." Sorry, but those two comments together seem to me to mean, "wow, you people are trippy. The president 'doesn't meddle' and you cheer him, then somewhere else he wades right in to 'meddle' and you cheer him again. "

See this doesn't make any sense, this is why I explained that different regions require different geo-political strategies. Obama was right not to meddle in Iran (you've said yourself you agreed with his actions - so this is a none issue). Obama was right to give tough love to Africa (which again you yourself agree) because he's in a unique position to do that more than any other president, simply for being who he is the first african-american president he can deliever that message much more effectively.

So we're being trippy for supporting his actions in each of these cases, even though they were the correct actions.

Oookay.

"But I guess we're still going with an Obama speech did it all?"

Your quoting one article over and over again. Every expert middle eastern analyst who follow the region closely: Fareed Zakaria, Reza Aslan, Nicholas Burns, Afshin Molavim, so and so on. Have credited President Obama for changing the dynamics in the region with his outreach. It wasn't just one speech, but the language he has used toward the Muslim world since his election. the Interview he did with Al Arabiya, his speech to the turkish Parliment, sending George Mitchell as his envoy for the peace process right away, his Happy nowruz message to the Iranian people. These have all had an effect in changing the tone of the relationship between the America and Muslim world.

Considering conservatives bloggers have constantly mock this outreach, your attitude doesn't surprise me.

re: Iran "This unrest has been building for years, not months. The fraudulent elections triggered the unrest."

re: Lebanon "Looking back on Bush's second term, however, we can see how almost all the neocon foreign policy directives evaporated--as did the swagger."

But I guess we're still going with an Obama speech did it all?

Ryan_C, I did reread TCTimmy's comments again and I stand by my interpretation. I guess it's because I have read a lot of his commentary here and feel that I recognized the dry sarcasm of his comment-- "I thought this was none of our business? Seems like selective meddling so far in the first five months." It is a familiar tone that he adopts, and that I find amusing when he does.

I found this particular comment as similar to another he made on this same thread, when he wrote of President Obama, "His supporters make excuses for him when he meddles and when he does not meddle. Hope and Change depending on the circumstances I guess." Sorry, but those two comments together seem to me to mean, "wow, you people are trippy. The president 'doesn't meddle' and you cheer him, then somewhere else he wades right in to 'meddle' and you cheer him again. "

Timmy, if I am misrepresenting the meaning of your comments, feel free to say so.

Timmy why respond to my article then delete it?
I mean you write some lies i respond to you with facts then you delete them? I didn't write anything bad it was the truth. I repeat Ghana isn't the best example of a democratic state in Africa.
Posted by: Al | Jul 12, 2009 9:14:19 PM
__________________________________

Well, I don't know what you are talking about because "Timmy" cannot delete anything. I think your beef is with the ABC monitors. But what do I know - I'm just a liar.

Moderate, maybe you should reread Timmy's comments.

"I thought this was none of our business?

Seems like selective meddling so far in the first five months."

I don't think I "mischaracterized" anyone's argument. The complaints regarding Obama's speech is based more on sour grapes than anything else. Obama has done much in a short time to rebuilding and repairing America's image abroad. The fact that their are Americans complaining about that I just find amazing.

"I find it highly ironic that conservative here are complaining about Obama giving tough love to Kenya and africa?

Whaaaat? Isn't that the message conservatives have been trying to push for years, that Africa needs to take more responsibility for itself, that it needs more good governance and less charity, etc, etc. You'd think conservatives would be applauding Obama's speech rather than complaining about it."

Mike, I think it's pretty clear it's not the message that matters to those people, anything President Obama does has to be condemned. It's part of the program.

Timmy why respond to my article then delete it?
I mean you write some lies i respond to you with facts then you delete them? I didn't write anything bad it was the truth. I repeat Ghana isn't the best example of a democratic state in Africa.

I'll keep trying, Mike, but I'm starting to feel like I sometimes do when I have office hours and a student sitting across the desk from me who doesn't get what I'm saying no matter how many different ways I say it. I'll persevere because the moment when I stumble across a way to explain my point that the student actually understands and responds to is so very satisfying. It's what keeps teachers teaching.

You summarize my response incorrectly. No, I am not objecting to the enthusiastic African response to President Obama. Far from it. When I spoke of the "worshipful attitude some display" I was speaking of commenters on this blog, such as Danita, not of Africans quotes in articles. Sorry I was not clearer. That sentence did rather run on.

To further clarify, I was defending the remarks of others, whom you had derided as conservatives complaining about President Obama's tough stance on African leaders. I was arguing that those conservative commenters did not seem to me to have a problem with what Obama said, but perhaps with their view of his statements as hypocritical (in addition to their view-- which I share-- that many commenters were exaggerating the impact of his words).

Finally, I am very well aware that each country, each region, each group is unique and must be dealt with accordingly. That being said, it is helpful when a country projects an overall general attitude that is then adjusted to particular circumstances. I generally praised Obama's approach to the Iran situation, as you may or may not recall. I was simply saying that I felt you had mischaracterized the arguments of those who were not enthusiastic about Obama's Africa statement we're talking about here.

"They are not complaining about Obama's remarks on Africa so much as on the double standard concerning when such "tough love" is okay and when it is verboten as well as about the insanely worshipful attitude some display toward his remarks, as if his stance regarding Africa is markedly different from that of previous presidents of both parties in the recent past."

So to summarize, you take issue with how the africans are responding enthusiastically to Obama's message, even though Obama's message is not that much different from president's of the past?

Okay, so it seem your biggest issue is with the Africans reaction, then take it up with them. It's not like Obama has any control over how Africans react enthusiastically to him

Yes, I'm aware of your alias "Moderate" whatever you like to call yourself. And your still missing the point. Different regions require different political geo-stratagies.

The fact that you have veteran republican foriegn policy experts such as Kissinger, Powell and Baker, have approved of how Obama has been handling international affiars so far pretty much nullifies all the conservative complaints here.

am kenyan and very tired of tiranny and leaders who see the world from their chauvinist and grandious egos.They are clearly uncomfortable with the exposure they are getting as you can see them suggesting that Obama talks to them privately
corrupt people hate the cameras on them.these dinosours have been in these offices for way too long anyway!

"Maybe you just didn't SEE Bush's efforts - or you don't want to. You can't pretend to know all that goes on behind the scenes in this complex world."

What Bush Efforts? He undermined President Khatami, who was the most reformist minded president in Iran since the revolution. He lumped Iran into the Axis of Evil, eventhough Iran helped us in ousting the Taliban in Afghanistan after 911 - Colin Powell who was Secretary of state at the time said so himself and admitted that the US and Iran had begun low level contacts. It was under President Bush tenure that Ahmadinejad got elected, if anything Bush made the perfect foil for the hardline clerics and Ahmadinejad and undermined the reformers for years, the Reformers under Khatami actually went out of their way to publicly tell the Bush Administration to stop supporting them, because they were not helping them.

Umm, Mike, I think you are missing the point. You wrote, " find it highly ironic that conservative here are complaining about Obama giving tough love to Kenya and africa?" I am a moderate, not a conservative, but the way I read comments by Timmy and others who might be considered conservatives (and of course Danita will tell you I am a faux moderate who is actually a conservative myself) is they are not complaining about Obama's remarks on Africa so much as on the double standard concerning when such "tough love" is okay and when it is verboten as well as about the insanely worshipful attitude some display toward his remarks, as if his stance regarding Africa is markedly different from that of previous presidents of both parties in the recent past.

Once again, this Lebanon thing has been going on for several years as reality hit home. The Obama speech helped reinforce the message already in place.

"A hypothesis: The old boss who Obama will end up imitating is not Bill Clinton--regardless of Hillary at Foggy Bottom--but George W. Bush.

"Looking back on Bush's second term, however, we can see how almost all the neocon foreign policy directives evaporated--as did the swagger.

"And in Lebanon, as of 2004, the U.S. created a bodyguard of U.N. resolutions to protect the country from Syria, to bring to trial the assassins of Rafiq Hariri and to contain Hezbollah. Yet that didn't prevent Damascus from systematically violating those resolutions and undermining Lebanese sovereignty; nor did it prevent Hezbollah from rearming, despite U.N. decisions, via Syrian territory.

"In none of these countries--Iran, Afghanistan and Lebanon--did the U.S. go it alone. The Bush administration tied itself down with ropes of international consent that left room for others to limit American actions. That squared little with the neocon yearning that no state or group of states should balance America in the pursuit of its national objectives."

Mike & Danita,

"Things have improved here but there are so many things I want to do and I just can't stop thinking about them," says 20-year-old Parisa - not her real name.

"Born after the 1979 Islamic Revolution she is part of the baby boom generation encouraged by high rates of population growth at the time of the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war.

"An estimated 70% of Iran's population is under 30 years of age."

An article written after Obama's Cairo speech? No. It's from a BBC article publish July 10, 2003 titled "Iran's frustrated generation."

This unrest has been building for years, not months. The fraudulent elections triggered the unrest.

Maybe the best way to make inroads over the years has been to plant the seeds of unrest behind the scenes? They see what the rest of the world has and they want it too. They see that Iran is free and they want to be free too. They see what a great place Europe is and they want a great place too.

Maybe you just didn't SEE Bush's efforts - or you don't want to. You can't pretend to know all that goes on behind the scenes in this complex world.

It's just like you, danita, accusing him of holding up in his office. I've read articles of servicemen and 9/11 victims being escorted into back rooms while Bush was "on the road" so that he could personally thank them or comfort them. That's the George Bush you are blinded too.

And BTW Mike_C, I don't hate Obama and I never said I did. I strongly disagree with him and will ridicule him but I do not hate him.

Timmy . . . If you had kept reading, Posted by: danita | Jul 12, 2009 4:45:06 PM
_____________________________________

Your response has nothing to do with my comments admiring a member of the Kenyan press who actually stands for something. Maybe that's why he's respected. Unlike our press who get tingles...

But whatever...

I find it highly ironic that conservative here are complaining about Obama giving tough love to Kenya and africa?

Whaaaat? Isn't that the message conservatives have been trying to push for years, that Africa needs to take more responsibility for itself, that it needs more good governance and less charity, etc, etc. You'd think conservatives would be applauding Obama's speech rather than complaining about it.

I find it highly ironic that conservative here are complaining about Obama giving tough love to Kenya and africa?

Whaaaat? Isn't that the message conservatives have been trying to push for years, that Africa needs to take more responsibility for itself, that it needs more good governance and less charity, etc, etc. You'd think conservatives would be applauding Obama's speech rather than complaining about it.