Updated: Mar 26
As we demonstrated in our article, “Putin And Democrats Are Ideological Soulmates” Russian dictator Vladimir Putin’s critique of the West would find a ready home at most
American colleges and universities and among many Democrats and their allies in the media and liberal think tanks.
And Putin’s criticisms are especially resonant with what former President Barack Obama said during his infamous “apology tour” about the country he was elected to govern. During his apology tour Obama made a point of admitting that “at times we sought to dictate our terms” and “that all too often our government trimmed facts and evidence to fit ideological predispositions.”
What were those terms dictated by our “ideological predispositions” Obama was apologizing for? They were best summed-up this way in the National Security Strategy of his predecessor, George W. Bush:
The great struggles of the 20th century between liberty and totalitarianism ended with a decisive victory for the forces of freedom — and a single sustainable model for national success: freedom, democracy and free enterprise.
These values of freedom are right and true for every person, in every society — and the duty of protecting these values against their enemies is the common calling of freedom-loving people across the globe and across the ages.
In a February 24, 2022, address on Russian state TV President Putin said:
Why is this happening? [the encroachment of NATO into Russia’s “near abroad”] Where did this insolent manner of talking down from the height of their [Western] exceptionalism, infallibility, and all-permissiveness come from? What is the explanation for this contemptuous and disdainful attitude to our interests and absolutely legitimate demands?
Anything that does not suit the dominant state, the powers that be, is denounced as archaic, obsolete, and useless. At the same time, everything it regards as useful is presented as the ultimate truth and forced on others regardless of the cost, abusively and by any means available. Those who refuse to comply are subjected to strong-arm tactics.
…they have deceived us, or, to put it simply, they have played us. Sure, one often hears that politics is a dirty business. It could be, but it shouldn’t be as dirty as it is now, not to such an extent. This type of con-artist behaviour is contrary not only to the principles of international relations but also and above all to the generally accepted norms of morality and ethics. Where are justice and truth here? Just lies and hypocrisy all around.
Would we be wrong in saying Putin’s complaints about the arrogant behavior of America and the Western nations of NATO sounds exactly like what Obama was apologizing for?
In 2014, in a clear repudiation of President George W. Bush’s statement “These values of freedom are right and true for every person, in every society — and the duty of protecting these values against their enemies is the common calling of freedom-loving people across the globe and across the ages,” then-President Obama made only perfunctory complaints and gave only perfunctory support to Ukraine when Putin ordered the invasion and annexation of the Ukrainian territory of Crimea and supported Russian separatists in Ukraine’s Donbas region.
Democrats can’t really have it both ways. America can’t be both the protector of liberty around the world and the nation that “at times… sought to dictate our terms” and “all too often… trimmed facts and evidence to fit ideological predispositions.”
Either Obama’s criticism of America’s National Security Strategy during the Bush years was right, in which case Vladimir Putin’s objections to alleged American arrogance and bullying are right. Or, George W. Bush’s National Security Strategy was right, in which case Obama’s rejection of it and weakness in the face of Putin’s 2014 aggression in Crimea and Donbas put in motion today’s war. If there’s a third alternative, we’d welcome hearing it.
Ukraine military capability
Friends of Ukraine Network
military aid to Ukraine
Barack Obama apology tour