The Cry of Freedom Goes Unheard in Washington

Why can't the President hear the cries of freedom from Iranian citizens who are murdered in the streets by a totalitarian government? Why did he squander this unique opportunity to foster the growth of liberty in one of the most dangerous countries in the world? The answers to these questions remain a mystery. The explanation that a stronger response would only lead to more killing a fallacy. The US did nothing and the slaughter continues as far as we know, since there is essentially a media blackout save for occasional Internet communication.

No one is suggesting that a stronger response could have affected the outcome now, but that is not the point. The issue is assisting the beginnings of freedom in a country that has none, and to show support for a brighter future for the Iranian people. That is not a lot to expect from the world's leading democracy.

Compare Obama's timid and muddled response to that of Ronald Reagan to the Solidarity labor movement in Poland in 1981. His clear words that the oppressors could no longer expect business as usual when dealing with the United States struck a chord in every Polish household, and his emotional support was an important ingredient in the eventual liberation of Poland and Eastern Europe.

The Reagan response was a clear example of statesmanship, and a blueprint on how to deal with dictatorships. The Obama response an example of timidity and appeasement. It was the worst possible response at the worst possible time, and unfortunately we will all suffer for it.