On Saturday, Ahmadinejad taunted the world by saying that Iran would decide its foreign policy based on how other countries treated the election results. Even from the point of view of cold-blooded self-interest, for the U.S. to have acceded to that kind of blackmail would have been a disastrous impression to give Iran’s rulers. – George Packer (via Andrew)

So the only appropriate response to the empty threats of a tinpot thug is to send a message by doing precisely the opposite of what he’s demanding? Why, if statesmanship worked like that, you’d think that such a thug could get his way just by demanding that you act in precisely the way he doesn’t want you to, in the hopes that you’ll then e.g. take sides in a conflict where you have no stake and so delegitimize his opponents. But of course we all know that the most important thing in statecraft is never, ever to give the impression of weakness; if a given course of action could possibly be viewed as the outcome of blackmail, then that is a course that should be avoided at all costs.

In any case, Packer is surely right that being labeled as “agents of America” is among the least of the worries of the Iranian protesters; the point, though, is that the perils they’re presently in would become that much worse if such an association were really to take off. And so far as I know, no realist is disputing that Obama was right to speak out against the violence and call for a greater toleration of dissent – it’s taking sides or making claims about the result of the election* that would be inappropriate, and the president was clearly wise to avoid doing just that. It’s not “difficult” at all, either for a pundit or a politician, to see the dangers of the Iranian regime or the shamefulness in what’s happening on the streets of Tehran; the challenge for a statesman is to determine how best to respond.

* Packer claims that Obama said “circumstances and Iranian public opinion seem to point in [the] direction” of fraud, but in fact the president said no such thing.

UPDATE: Alex Massie has more on the bizarre criticisms of Obama’s restraint.

Filed under: foreign affairs, politics