THE CHRONICLE had another good foreign policy editorial today.It called for . . .
. . . global scorn of the show trials now underway in Iran, "a mockery of justice that must not go unremarked."
What was refreshing about this one, as with a good piece on North Korea in June, is that it found no occasion to blame the United States.
The reflex of an American leftist who criticizes Iran is to add a sentence or paragraph about Mossadeq, 1953, and the CIA. This softens whatever criticism the writer may have laid down against the illiberal mullahs. But it serves the more important purpose of protecting him from being mistaken for things worse than illiberal mullahs -- namely neocons, American exceptionalists, or George W. Bush.
Shamefully, our own president did exactly this in his June 4 speech in Cairo.
Today's editorial simply and correctly blamed the evildoers in Tehran for their own evil doings.
That was refreshing.
* * *
For a corrective essay on how the same editorial board can get things exactly right one time, then exactly wrong in another editorial on the same general subject a few weeks later, read this.
What may be happening is that the one known adult on the board -- David Langworthy -- is sometimes given his rein on foreign policy and delivers up something sensible.
Then one of the red-hots, heedless of what has gone before, dabbles with the same subject and delivers up predictable nonsense from the liberal grooveyard.
* * *
Encouraging bad thoughts (global scorn) about the Iranian government -- as the Chronicle did today -- is necessary first step. Alas, it is hardly an answer to questions about how to stop Tehran from sponsoring terrorists against Israel or building a nuclear weapon and deploying it against Israel.
Can the Chronicle build on today's good start by suggesting answers to these questions, even though no answer can possibly be a risk- or cost-free?
Comments