Remember when the right-wing Canadian government tried to interfere in the U.S. presidential election by leaking an internal memo claiming that an Obama advisor had assured them that Obama's criticisms of NAFTA were just for show? It was a big deal in Canada -- a political scandal. The parliamentary opposition took the government to task for its interference, and the government had to apologize.
Now unnamed European bureaucrats are trying to do the same thing that outraged Canada's opposition. The Washington Post reported Sunday that "Europe Fears Obama Might Undercut Progress With Iran."
Nice headline, eh? Did they do a poll to find out what "Europe" thinks? No, the Post talked to "European officials" who are "are increasingly concerned that Sen. Barack Obama's campaign pledge to begin direct talks with Iran on its nuclear program without preconditions could potentially rupture U.S. relations with key European allies early in a potential Obama administration."
Who are these brave European bureaucrats, so eager for confrontation with Iran, so deeply invested in the shibboleth that there can be no enrichment of uranium on Iranian soil that is at the heart of the current impasse? They declined to identify themselves. The Post says that the European officials:
spoke on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to be seen as interfering with U.S. politics
Have you ever noticed that when it is reported that "unnamed officials" refuse to be identified because they didn't want to appear to be doing X, it's usually because X is exactly what they are doing, and they don't want to be held accountable for it? Isn't the Washington Post telling us what's the real motivation of the "European officials" -- and, quite likely, their Cheney faction instigators in the Bush Administration -- in pitching this story to the Post?
Consider the logic of that sentence. Either the European officials are interfering in the U.S. presidential election or they aren't. The act is the same, regardless of whether they are named or not. So, what the sentence is really saying is:
spoke on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to be held accountable for interfering with U.S. politics
I hope that opposition parliamentarians in the UK, France, Germany and the European Parliament will take to the floor and pound the podium. This is outrageous interference. The same European lackeys who enabled Bush and Cheney when they invaded Iraq in flagrant violation of international law are now enabling Bush and Cheney in working to undermine the prospects of a truly negotiated solution of the standoff with Iran. Now, at long last, we're having a real fight in the United States about whether the U.S. could engage in real diplomacy. Unnamed Cheneyista Eurocrats should butt out.
To inspire our European friends who support real diplomacy, here's what the Canadian opposition had to say about NAFTAmemogate, and how the Canadian government was forced to respond, as it was reported at the time:
[fighting] erupted in Parliament as [Prime Minister] Harper fended off allegations that he was interfering in the U.S. elections and trying to undermine Mr. Obama's campaign... it was Canada's leading critic of Nafta, New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton, who raised an ABC News report that identified Mr. Harper's chief of staff, Ian Brodie, as the source of the leak.
"Canadians have become increasingly alarmed at reports that the prime minister's office has been interfering in the Democratic primaries with false accusations, trying to silence Barack Obama who simply wants to amend the Nafta," Mr. Layton told Parliament before demanding that Mr. Harper fire Mr. Brodie, "the source of the interference."
...
"I can only surmise that Mr. Harper wants to silence those in the U.S. Democratic race who are trying to raise issues about Nafta and, in doing so, help his Republican friends through a happy coincidence," Mr. Layton said. "Canadians would be very concerned if there were any similar attempts by Americans to influence a Canadian election."
...
Mr. Harper said the Canadian embassy in Washington "regretted the fact that information has come out that would imply that Senator Obama has been saying different things in public than in private. The government of Canada does not condone this and certainly regrets any implication."
It would be a very healthy thing for U.S.-European relations if those "unnamed European officials" were identified and their governments would express regret for their remarks. And it would help prevent the prospect of real diplomacy from being derailed.