In the "war of words" between Hugo Chavez and George W. Bush, or more accurately the Bush Administration, the exchanges have taken on a decided flavor of a playground squabble. Chavez is both volatile and prone to provocative statements. As often as not, his remarks contain far more than simply a grain of truth and wit. Two things resonate from his remarks, however, that highlight the incompetence of the Bush Administration. The first is that Chavez is responding to provocation from the US. The second is that his remarks demonstrate a nearly complete loss of moral authority and respect that the US once held in the international community.
The US can attempt to impose an “arms embargo” upon Venezuela. There is no credible evidence that Venezuela is attempting to purchase or amass any extraordinary cache of arms. In light of its track record over the past few years, it is as likely as not that any such “evidence” advanced by the Bush Administration would be fabricated or based upon dubious information sources. There are probably more arms and munitions brought into New York City, Philadelphia and Boston each month than are being acquired by Chavez. Moreover, Chavez has no need to acquire weapons from US manufacturers, as there clearly is a global market for such goods. In the past, French and Israeli arms manufacturers have been more than willing to step into the void left by such US embargoes.
Yet the Bush Administration apparently sees some political advantage in demonizing and attacking Chavez. Truth be told, there is far more evidence of corruption, disregard of human rights, interference with free speech and democratic principles and imperialist behavior on the part of the Bush Administration than has been evidenced by Chavez. Chavez is no choirboy, but he is the duly and democratically elected leader of a sovereign nation. No claims here to being a professional psychologist, but could it be that the allegations against Chavez are merely projecting upon Chavez the types of improper behavior of the accusers, and an attempt to deflect attention from the true source of the problem?
Another interesting development is that more recent comments by Chavez are marked more by mockery than by aggression. They are simply derisive and sometimes sarcastic. He responds publicly to actions by the Bush Administration that represent attacks upon Chavez and his government. In other words, Chavez seems to regard the US without any great fear and without much respect. He has also learned that a majority of US citizens do not approve of the Bush Administration handling of US foreign policy. Thus Chavez carefully directs his comments to the US government and not the US people generally. To the contrary, he has taken steps to lessen the harsh burden of prices for heating oil in New England families, just as he has used oil for diplomatic and humanitarian purposes in the Caribbean and in other South American countries.
The Bush Administration seems to hold as a key tenet of its "foreign policy" the subversion of existing regimes with which it cannot seem to get along diplomatically, which seems to be virtually every foreign government that stands up to Bush Administration attempts to bully and intimidate. The apparent belief that Bush could curry significant support among the Venezuelan people is not only mistaken, it is foolish. Whatever dissatisfaction there may be with Chavez and his government is clearly overborne by the sense of outrage and anger against the Bush Administration.
As my Grandpa used to tell me: "if you wish to be respected, you must first act respectably, treat others with respect and thereby earn respect. You cannot demand and expect to receive genuine respect by using your fists or a gun." My Grandpa barely had a high school education, but I believe that he was smarter and more learned than the President of the United States. I would no longer wish to be or wish my children to be President, but I certainly would want them to emulate my Grandpa. He was a man to be respected and admired, rather than one to be subjected to justifiable public ridicule.
No comments:
Post a Comment