JustinLogan.com

"To Hell With Limited Government -- Let's Get Re-elected!!!"

David Boaz calls out the Bush apologists.

-Moldova Update-

Unfortunately, in an email to a colleague, I was prescient:

"I've got to say, the Christian Democrats have real balls, because they and their incessant protests could really push Voronin over the brink. He's been remarkably restrained so far, but you have to wonder what it would take to push a former KGB manager over the edge. I really believe he's a Soviet throwback, and a pretty despicable guy (as I'm sure you well know), but I wonder if he might just give up control...let's hope."

Then the next day (today) this report comes out.

Georgia Regime Falls...Could Moldova Be Next???

So I know, I'm late on the scene in remarking about the downfall of the Georgian regime, and the remarkably smooth transition that's underway there. I'm not really qualified to comment on the intricacies of Georgian politics, except to note the paranoid tone of the Russians regarding the slightest regional instability. Russian foreign minister Igor Ivanov says that the revolution was aided by "attempts to interfere into internal affairs by certain countries and separate states. Unfortunately, this is no exception. We face similar facts also in other cases..."

Methinks he may be referring to this case. If so, it looks as though he may be right. Reports from Moldova indicate several things.

First, the so-called "Kozak Memorandum," a sham proposal to "federalize" and "demilitarize" Moldova, providing essentially complete sovereignty for the illegal Smirnov regime in Tiraspol, as well as for the ethnic Gagauz minority, was thwarted, in no small part because of the protests organized by the Christian Democrats, among others. I had previously complained about the small size of the protests, but it appears the Kozak plan aroused a great deal of dissent, mobilizing between 2 and 8,000 people to take to the streets.

Second, it looks as though the opposition are redirecting the outrage over the Kozak memo towards President Voronin. BASA Press reports:

The protesters in Chisinau demand the dismissal of President Vladimir Voronin, dissolution of the parliament and convocation of early legislative elections.

The column of protesters, who walked to the Russian Embassy in Chisinau round 12.30 p.m. stopped for about 20 minutes in front of the Presidential Palace, demanding the chief of state to tender his resignation and accusing him of betrayal. The protesters showed indignation about president's intention to sign the Russian memorandum on settlement of the Transnistrian crisis, warning that this document will direct to loss of independence and sovereignty by Moldova.

The protesters walked later to the Russian Embassy to Moldova from the presidency headquarters.

The protests are organised by the Committee for Defence of Moldova's Independence and Constitution, which includes the majority of political parties and many non-governmental organisations.

This is staggering, particularly in light of the sudden, drastic turn of events in Tbilisi. Not surprisingly, the Russians are already whining over Voronin's refusal to sign the outrageous document.

Also particularly remarkable is the fact that the State Department took the bold step of criticizing the regime in Georgia, and that was particularly helpful in bringing it down. One can only hope that the US will at the very least tacitly support the fight for freedom in Moldova, and not play Risk with the Russians over it.

Hat tips to Marian Tupy and Oana Truta.

Limbaugh Says "I Am Not a Hypocrite"

Freshly rehabbed, Rush Limbaugh has proclaimed that he's not a hypocrite. Back on air, Limbaugh has just quipped:

"Just because I may have been doing something that appeared to be contradictory to what I was suggested others do doesn't mean that what I was suggesting others do was wrong," he said. "Critics want to harp on all this hypocrisy, there is no hypocrisy in this."

(I assume that the first use of "suggested" in the above quote is a typo.)

No libertarian I know was chastising Rush for "suggesting others" not do drugs. That's a moral judgment, and a perfectly acceptable one. The reprehensible thing about the Limbaugh affair is that Limbaugh has said that jailing nonviolent drug users is the just way to police people's private behavior. Then, if you're not a hypocrite, Rush, GO TO JAIL. Do not pass go, do not collect $200 million. Just GO TO JAIL. What's good for a poor black kid in the inner city is good for pompous radio screamers.

Rush's spokesperson says that "he does not expect the talk show host will be prosecuted because Florida prosecutors typically pursue drug dealers rather than users." Oh, is that so? You might try telling that to the thousands of people locked up in Florida for drug possession. If there's any justice in this world, some politically motivated prosecutor will hold Rush to the same standard of "justice" that he advocates for everybody else.

Maybe-It's-Not-Just-Hyperbole Comment of (Last) Week:

"We have created a failed state."

-Newsweek's Jon Meacham on the Chris Matthews Show last week, commenting on Iraq

US Promises No Involvement in Chechnya or Moldova in Exchange for Another Glimpse of Putin's Soul

Several of my comrades have commented to me about the rather...er...esoteric nature of my posts on Moldovan/Russian/Romanian relations. I took an interest in the matter first when I was in Romania in March of 2002, and there were lots of perplexing manifestations going on in the capital. After doing a little digging (and learning a few Romanian words), I figured out what it was that they were protesting -- the Russian military presence in a tiny slice of neighbor Moldova. The tiny slice was called Transnistria, and in 2002 it still housed the Soviet 14th army. And it still does to this day. That's part of the reason why Iuri Rosca and his Christian Democrats have been protesting outside of the Russian embassy in Moldova.

Well, the Russians don't much like that. So they've leaned on their man in Chisinau, Moldova's Communist President (and ethnic Russian) Vladimir Voronin, to put a stop to it. And he's obliging. The first sad thing about the entire situation was the puny size of the protests. When I was in Romania, there were thousands and thousands of students marching, so many that it looked like either the protests were going to work or else end up another Tiananmen Square. This time, extremely charitable estimates put the total size of the protests at around 2,000 people.

The most outrageous thing about this new series of protests, though, is the fact that the Russian First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs had this to say about setting up a new timeframe for pulling out the illegal Russian military presence in Transnistria:

"...no concrete timing should be imposed, because when we have one, opposing forces [in Transnistria] have a good possibility to strongly press on Russia, to procrastinate that process, and thus make us late. So, my personal opinion is that no deadlines should be set." (full article here)

No deadlines should be set. So the Russian line is now: "Hey, we don't want to tick off the separatist regime in Transnistria (that only exists because we say it can) by trying to pull out our troops by a discrete time (which we've already said we'd do, and failed to), so we're just going to leave them there until we can get them out without aggravating anybody. We have no idea when that will be."

If there was ever any doubt about President Putin's desire to reinstitute a Russian sphere of influence in his neighborhood, there shouldn't be anymore. Imagine the Transnistrian problem thus: If Presidents Bush and Putin were both ethnically Chechen (stay with me, here), and Bush continually supports the Chechens and the policies that benefit them. Because of the huge power discrepancy, Putin can't really stand up to Bush (and he doesn't really want to, anyway). Putin also wants to benefit the Chechens, but realizes that it's political suicide to come out publicly on their behalf. So the OSCE comes up with a harebrained scheme to "federalize" Russia, with Chechnya being a largely autonomous body with voting rights in the Duma and home rule. Chechnya arose because of, and is protected by, an illegal American army that occupies it. Now make Bush into Putin, Putin into Voronin, Chechnya into the ethnic Russian minority in Moldova, and leave the OSCE as is, and you've got a reasonable (but grossly oversimplified) analogy for the current state of things in Moldova. Simple, huh?

Why Robert Byrd Is Cool

It's official: The idiocy of the American legislature knows no bounds. Today our government acted to impose sanctions on Syria. I mean, one could understand how, after our unilateral embargoes brought Fidel Castro and Saddam Hussein to their knees, they could get all excited about the prospects of taking down Assad with the same strategy.

For the record, let's just put unilateral economic sanctions in the proper light. They are immoral, ineffective policies that make politicians feel good. They are immoral because they are intended to make the targeted population so miserable that they overthrow their ruling regime. They are ineffective because they ignore the fact that the US is not the only economic player in the world. Any product or service that Syria was getting from the US, it can get elsewhere. The case advocates of sanctions often point to as a glowing example is South Africa, but a strong case can be made that the apartheid regime was on its way out by the time the sanctions took effect. Also in that case, the entire world was behind the sanctions. If the subject interests you, this book is generally a good read. I also wrote a paper on the topic in college that I'm thinking of posting here. If you're interested, comment and let me know.

Once again, however, Robert Byrd gets the foreign policy angle right. Quoth Byrd:

"I have not seen any evidence that would lead me to believe that it is the government of Syria that is responsible for the attacks against our troops in Iraq," the West Virginia Democrat said.

"Such insinuations can only build the case for military action against Syria, which, unfortunately, is a very real possibility because of the dangerous doctrine of pre-emption created by the (George W.) Bush administration," said Byrd, an outspoken critic of US Middle East policy, particularly in Iraq.

Bobby, economic populism notwithstanding, I love ya. Even though every Senator except you and your three comrades buys the company line, keep the faith, brother. We're listening out here.

Ban the Ban!

It's official. The movement to stop the public health goons in DC has its website up and running. Please visit the site and buy lots of swag!

Free Trade Hypocrisy

Commerce Secretary Don Evans had a remarkably hypocritical Op-Ed in the WSJ today (password required). In it, Evans issues several proclamations:

"If you believe in free trade you must also insist on a level playing field and you must take issue with trading partners that tolerate or facilitate an unequal relationship."

"China needs to open markets, drop trade barriers, eliminate state subsidies and allow market forces to determine economic decisions."

My favorite, though, is this gem:

"If [China] value[s] access to American markets, the Chinese government must accelerate the pace of reform by dropping trade barriers, ending state-subsidies and speeding up its transition to an open, fully market-based economy."

Thus, if you don't stop pursuing the destructive policies of protectionism, we'll start pursuing the destructive policies of protectionism.

Perhaps Don and Lou, two self-proclaimed advocates of free markets, could do a little boning up on their Milton Friedman. Aside from the fact that Messrs. Evans and Dobbs are incorrect on the economics of this matter (the US would experience a net gain by unilaterally liberalizing trade, whereas retaliatory trade protectionism causes a deadweight loss), they fail to recognize that the US could, in fact, be leading the way on promoting free trade. Instead, the Administration has promoted steel tariffs, softwood lumber protections, and an abominable farm subsidy bill.

If the Administration wants to talk the talk about free trade, it ought to start walking the walk...

Ken Adelman on Romania

In National Review this morning, party-line Defense Policy Board member Ken Adelman says that Romania can stand as an example for Iraq.

Except for one little thing. Romania overthrew its own tyrant. The Romanian people rose up, against all odds, to cast off a tyrant just as barbaric and repressive as Saddam. Adelman chooses not to see that the reason Iraqis can't "draft [a democratic constitution] without gunfire and explosions ringing in their ears" is that the good ol' US of A is taking care of things.

Romania has had a damned tough time as it is. Corruption, poverty, unemployment, and a murky legal system have all hobbled the Romanian recovery. And that's what comes with legitimacy. What will come of our top down, centrally planned, externally imposed people's revolution? Perhaps Adelman could comment on that?