Double standards

The supine response of the West, in particular the US, to the slaughter of hundreds of innocent civilians by the ‘friendly’ Uzbek regime confirms the double standards argument. Why is democracy good for Iraq but not Uzbekistan? Why is Lithuania congratulated but the democracy movement in Uzbekistan dissuaded? Why is democracy good for Afghanistan, but not Saudi Arabia, whose repressive regime is not dissimilar to the odious Taliban? Why is Iran condemned but not Saudi? Can any fair-minded person reasonably say that Saudi is more open and free than Iran?

There is only one explanation, which can sound rhetorical but it is difficult to avoid it. It is that the US is not interested in spreading freedom and democracy, but wants to protect its own strategic and economic interests. That is what explains the differential approach to dictatorship. The US approach to dictatorships is not based on how repressive they are, but on how accommodating the ruling elites are of US interests. In Iraq and Afghanistan an attempt is being to create a class of janissary politicians to protect US interests.