It's not easy to be an enlightened liberal internationalist these days.
 | |
| Resident Fellow David Frum | |
An enlightened liberal internationalist wants to send troops to the Sudanese region of Darfur to protect a majority Muslim population against murderous Islamic extremist militias.
On the other hand, he or she must oppose keeping troops in Iraq to protect a majority Muslim population against murderous Islamic extremist militias.
The enlightened liberal internationalist wants to use U.S. airpower to stop Osama bin Laden's allies in Khartoum from committing terrorist atrocities.
On the other hand, he or she must condemn the use of U.S. airpower to stop Osama bin Laden's allies in Iraq from committing terrorist atrocities.
NDP Leader Jack Layton summed up the two required points of view superbly in a pair of speeches he delivered last week. At a rally at Queen's Park in Toronto on April 30, timed to coincide with rallies in Washington, D.C. and across North America, Mr. Layton joined in a "scream" for Darfur. He declared: "Sometimes, there's a little too much thumb-twiddling." In a debate in the House of Commons the next day, he argued that it was immoral to stand by and do nothing as innocents are murdered.
On May 5, U.S. war protestor Cindy Sheehan passed through Ottawa--and afterward, Mr. Layton urged the Harper government to accede to Ms. Sheehan's request that Canada accept U.S. military deserters as refugees: "We should be looking at it. These young people are courageous individuals. They've made a decision of conscience."
But what if the U.S. deserter were running away from an assignment to Darfur? Would that be a "decision of conscience"? Or would that be standing by as innocents are murdered?
Two days after Ms. Sheehan's visit to Ottawa, the London Sunday Times gave the world the first detailed report on the murder of Iraqi television journalist Atwar Bahjat. Bahjat, a correspondent for the al-Arabiyya television network, was killed on Feb. 5, after filing three reports on the bombing of the golden shrine in the city of Samarra, her home. Last week, the Times obtained video footage of her final moments, recorded on a mobile phone. Here is how her friend and colleague Hala Jaber described them:
"First she was stripped to the waist, a humiliation for any woman, but particularly so for a pious Muslim who concealed her hair, arms and legs from men other than her father and brother. Then her arms were bound behind her back ... By the time filming begins, the condemned woman has been blindfolded with a white bandage. It is stained with blood that trickles from a wound on the left side of her head. She is moaning, although whether from the pain of what has already been done to her or from the fear of what is about to be inflicted is unclear ...
"A large man dressed in military fatigues, boots and cap approaches from behind and covers her mouth with his left hand. In his right hand, he clutches a large knife with a black handle and an 8-inch blade. He proceeds to cut her throat from the middle, slicing from side to side.
"Her cries--'Ah, ah, ah'--can be heard above the Allahu akbar intoned by the holder of the mobile phone.
"Even then, there is no quick release for Bahjat. Her executioner suddenly stands up, his job only half done. A second man in a dark T-shirt and camouflage trousers places his right khaki boot on her abdomen and pushes down hard eight times, forcing a rush of blood from her wounds as she moves her head from right to left.
"Only now does the executioner return to finish the task. He hacks off her head and drops it to the ground, then picks it up again and perches it on her bare chest so that it faces the film-maker ...
"She had nine drill holes in her right arm and 10 in her left [according to a friend who recovered her body]. The drill had also been applied to her legs, her navel and her right eye. One can only hope that these mutilations were made after her death."
This is only one of the thousands of murders committed in Iraq by al-Qaeda terrorists, Baathist thugs and Iranian-backed militias. Yet these crimes seem to evoke "screams" of pain and outrage only from half the political spectrum. Where is the other half? Why are they encouraging Americans to desert Atwan Bhajat--and those like her? How can they condemn jihad in Sudan as the equivalent of genocide in our time--and pardon an even crueler jihad in Iraq as legitimate national resistance?
Has hatred of America perverted their judgment? Or did they lack any judgment to pervert?
David Frum is a resident fellow at AEI.