Eric Draitser
March 18, 2014
On Thursday March 6th President Obama spoke at the White House on the referendum and the issue of Crimea. In his prepared remarks, Obama stated
categorically that the United States would not recognize the results of
the Crimean referendum. He argued that the it would violate both the
“Ukrainian Constitution and international law.” Obama kept the comedy
coming when he noted that, “In 2014 we are well beyond the days when
borders can be redrawn over the heads of democratic leaders.” As with
all statements made by the US government, and the President
specifically, this must be contextualized and deconstructed in order to
be effectively critiqued.
First and foremost is the question of
democracy and, more specifically, how exactly Washington is choosing to
define this gravely abused word. In referring to the so-called “interim
government” in Kiev, headed by Yatsenyuk and his associates, as
“democratic leaders”, Obama demonstrates either a complete lack of
understanding of the word democracy, or as I think is more
likely, an utter contempt for democratic principles. By referring to an
unelected entity that has seized political power in Kiev by force, and
through collaboration with Nazi elements, as “democratic leaders,” Obama
exposes himself and his administration to be cynical opportunists whose
interests rest not in democracy but in a geopolitical agenda guided
solely by strategic interests.
Naturally, the references to the
Ukrainian Constitution and international law are also deeply
disingenuous. Obama, and the US imperial system more generally, speak of
international law purely when it suits their interests, eschewing it
completely when it does not. This fact has been illustrated quite
clearly with Washington’s wars of aggression throughout that last two
decades, including the illegal wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, not
to mention the habitual violations of international law in Somalia,
Yemen, Pakistan and around the world.
The most significant point here is that
the US recognizes democracy and international law only when it suits
their interests. Moreover, US hypocrisy regarding democracy becomes self
evident if one examines the recent historical precedents of Kosovo and
South Sudan. In both these cases, precisely the same individuals who
today cry about international law and argue against the democratic right
of Crimea to determine its own future, were then eloquently and
unabashedly in favor of precisely the same sort “democratic
aspirations.”
