Conştiinţa Unui Liberal de Stânga

Conştiinţa Casei Albe

Michael Gerson, acum editorialist la Washington Post, a fost, timp de şase ani, speechwriter la Casa Albă. Mulţi dintre admiratorii săi îl numeau "conştiinţa Casei Albe". Astăzi comite un articol, "Inspiration and Danger in Georgia". Îl puteţi citi şi judeca singuri. Dar nu articolul merită atenţie, ci reacţiile cititorilor. Care sunt de o violenţă greu de înţeles aici, în România, unde probabil individul ar fi fost ridicat în slăvi de batalioanele de rusofobi care populează forumurile ziarelor şi care comentează pe bloguri.

Eu mi-am atras antipatia unora doar pentru că sunt bănuit că aş fi pro-rus, altminteri nu-şi explică de ce nu-i înjur vârtos, ca tot românul verde! Dar acelora care îi zic de la obraz ce cred, nu doar lui Gerson, dar şi fostului său şef de la Casa Albă, cam ce-ar trebui să li se întâmple: să fie acuzaţi de activităţi anti-americane, să li se pună telefoanele sub ascultare, să-i fişeze FBI pentru că pot fi potenţiali terorişti?

Sigur, când îl citeşti pe Gelson, înţelegi de ce SUA s-au angajat, în ultimii 8 ani, în războaie aventuroase şi inepte, care le-au erodat credibilitatea şi le-au dus în cea mai gravă criză economică de după Marea Depresie din 1929-1933: "Georgia has been foolish. But Russia's crude overreach has had one good effect -- revealing the courage of others. Poland has quickly upgraded its relations with America, even under nuclear threat from Russia. Ukraine has been defiant, even though Russia still makes claims on Crimea. These nations have recent memories of Russian national "pride." And their courage should provoke our own."

Doar două reacţii ale cititorilor, pe care cu greu le veţi găsi în România: "Their courage should provoke our own."You going to be out front against the Red Army - for that's still what it is - Colonel? You going to give up your own children to the fight? Yeah, I thought not.Before you filed this tosh did you look at reports from yesterday's NATO meeting? No one is going to fight Russia for anything because when it comes time to make the choice no one wants to give up their children and/or their own personal security to fight for Poland, Ukraine or the Baltics.Is this the kind of insight you bring to your other job at the Council on foreign Relations? No wonder America's foreign policy establishment can't come up with a good idea.Hope your colleague Anne Appelbaum has a house stateside. She's going to need it about two hours after the Missile Defense Shield components start arriving at Gdansk."

Sau asta:"Let's pretend, for a moment, we had inducted Georgia into NATO. Does that create a couple more divisions of the US army to protect poor little Georgia?No?Then what are you yammering about, Gershon?Russia wouldn't "dare" attack a NATO country? Only an idiot would believe that, which means it's probably going to be a Republican platform plank. Russia isn't afraid of the word NATO, it's afraid of the US army. If it has nothing to fear from the US army, and it doesn't, then extending the "NATO Shield" over eastern Europe simply devalues the meaning of the mutual defense pact.Like most conservative, you don't understand this, but saying something doesn't make it so. When you say a country belongs to NATO, you are saying we are willing to start World War III in defense of it. That willingness is what kept Russia east of the Fulda pass for fifty years, not some voodoo like fear of the word "NATO".So, no Mike, extending the NATO shield to countries we wont militarily defend is actually just another example of the conservatives well documented inability to think something all the way through to it's logical conclusion.What's frightening here, though, is we aren't talking about which political contributor is going to get keys to the treasury, we're talking about survival of the species. A miscalculation on the scale of our Iraq policy in this conflict wouldn't just result in a vast loss of blood, treasure and prestige for the US, it would result in a thermonuclear exchange with the Russians on a scale that would likely end mammalian life on this planet.As a mammal, I must object. You guys are not the ones to handle this problem, this is deadly serious and you guys are inveterate bunglers. Just sit next to the Western Europeans and nod you empty heads, otherwise we should all get busy digging bomb shelters."

Comentariile astea îmi amintesc de şuturile pe care le primea Cătălin Avramescu, actualmente "conştiinţa Cotrocenilor"(şi cu jumătate de normă, şi a PD-L), atunci când scria la "Cotidianul". Cei care îşi asumă rolul de "conştiinţe" trebuie să-şi asume şi riscul de a primi şuturi în fund atunci când îşi iau prea în serios rolul. Nu de altceva, dar când ajungi să te consideri "reper moral absolut, conştiinţă", trebuie să şi fii, nu doar să te închipui că eşti. Sau, cum scria, în acelaşi Washington Post David Ignatius, :"Now, after the Georgia war, McCain should learn that lesson: American leaders shouldn't make threats the country can't deliver or promises it isn't prepared to keep. The rhetoric of confrontation may make us feel good, but other people end up getting killed."

E cazul să înţeleagă asta şi Traian Băsescu, care de obicei întâi vorbeşte, după care, dacă îi mai rămâne ceva timp, gândeşte.