Tuesday, March 25, 2008

James McGovern (D-Mass) & FARC

One wonders how many congressmen have shadow foreign policy shops serving as intermediaries with terrorists. One is too many, but I suspect that there are others.

It’s a shame that the Congressman feels that State isn’t capitulating to FARC fast enough, but they really have had their hands full appeasing Iran and Syria lately.

This also points to the potential for the Colombian Free Trade agreement to help stabilize the country. FARC’s dead set against it, so the natural response is to reach out to it’s congressional critics. After all, we can't have the Colombians develop their economy by legitimate trade, now can we?

Did the congressman’s anti-trade position lead him into blundering into the role as FARC contact? Or was it the other way around?

I’d like to doubt that Congressman McGovern set out to intentionally become the front man for a bunch of murderous thugs, but given the left’s hero worship of repressive leaders from Lenin to Stalin to Mao to Castro to Chavez, I’m not sure I’d rule it out. There’s probably not much downside political risk to having Che posters on the wall in a safe Democratic seat in Massachusetts.

I’m having a tough time thinking of an equivalent worship on the part of American conservatives for right wing dictators. Chiang Kai-Shek? Ferdinand Marcos? Augusto Pinochet? The Shah? The chaps who used to run South Africa or Rhodesia?

Not many posters, t-shirts, little red books, or trips by sycophantic movie stars sold there. All of these guys were justified largely on the basis of being the least bad alternative. Whether that was sufficient justification or not can be debated.

Certainly almost any scenario where the Shah hangs on to power in Iran plays out better than the current mess.