1115.org

Starting six months before the 2004 elections, word was floated that the President wanted to stop being knows as the “war President” and start being recognized as the “peace President.” This sentiment worked with some gullible voters to soften a trigger-happy cowboy image and helped lay the foundation for an inaugural address that set a course toward “democracy promotion.” Setting aside the dime-turn that took us from unilateral war to peace and democracy promotion, it’s not enough to say you’re for democracy, you have to actually do it.

And if actions still speak louder than words, selling F-16 Fighting Falcons speaks louder than most actions. But it isn’t a democracy, or even a country on the road to democracy, who will benefit from the sale of the fighter jets. It’s War on Terror™ partner Pakistan, led by General Pervez Musharraf who seized power in a military coup over a duly elected leader, refuses to hold free elections, and looked the other way as one of it’s scientists sold nuclear technology to nations with which we’re not exactly on a first-name basis. To make matters much worse, Pakistan, like neighboring India, is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968, and both tested nuclear weapons in 1998.

Kashmir, the disputed territory at the heart of the ill will between India and Pakistan, has been the most dangerous location on earth for years. Selling advanced fighters to Pakistan combined with the reports of their breaking U.S. law by acquiring nuclear components on the black market tips the balance and destabilizes the region.

Pakistan has consistently been unable to apprehend Osama bin Laden, and won’t allow U.S. troops to search the tribal boarder area where he is thought to be hiding. India is a major trading partner, and an actual democracy complete with parties, a parliament and free elections. Beyond this specific instance, how does rewarding Pakistan at the expense of India serve the administration’s agenda of democracy promotion?

There are plenty of nations who aren’t moving toward democracy as fast as we would like them to. Do they get shiny new airplanes and stolen nuclear materials too? Obviously we live in a complicated world where not every piece of information should be made public. Diplomacy isn’t a cut-and-dried science, but a mercurial art. Still, when the U.S. state department issues a report like this it’s hard to imagine we’re helping ourselves much:

Although the report was critical of U.S. allies such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, the nearly 300-page document also illustrated exceptions to the administration’s pledge to make human rights the hallmark of its bilateral relations. Libya, for instance, was harshly condemned as “among the world’s worst violators of human rights,” but in the past year the administration has lifted economic sanctions and begun to normalize relations with Libya after it gave up its programs to build weapons of mass destruction.

Foreign policy, especially the high-wire act that is this administration’s hallmark, demands a clear voice to communicate our wishes, demands and intents. When our own government publishes a report criticizing some allies for human rights violations, but then turns around and rewards them for not living up to our expectations, we have at least a perception problem.

But then we have our own human rights disasters exactly where everyone is looking, and those cases didn’t even make it into the report. Three cheers for coherent policy!