Professor Bainbridge...on law, politics, religion, culture & food

Talk is not Appeasement

George Bush’s Knesset speech included this widely criticized gem:

Jews and Americans have seen the consequences of disregarding the words of leaders who espouse hatred. And that is a mistake the world must not repeat in the 21st century.

Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: “Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.” We have an obligation to call this what it is – the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.

George Bush has said a lot of asinine things over the years, but this one surely belongs at or near the top of the list.

The dictionary defines appeasement as “The policy of granting concessions to potential enemies to maintain peace.” Granting concessions. Not just talking.

At a time the Soviet Union had thousands of nuclear warheads targeted on the United States and thousands of tanks ready to pour through the Fulda Gap at any moment, Ronald Reagan famously said:

General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.

Yet, as Ed Meese Meese wrote, Ronald Reagan was a big believer in talk:

RONALD REAGAN WAS A STRONG BELIEVER IN PERSONAL DIPLOMACY-THE IDEA of having a face-to-face discussion with those he was seeking to persuade. That’s why, after becoming President, he often talked privately about the desire to engage the leader of the Soviet Union in a one-on-one conversation, to diminish any fear of the United States’ intentions and to seek common ground for reducing tensions and promoting peace.

This was not a new idea for the President. Years before, when he was governor of California, he spoke frequently of his desire to host Soviet leaders on a trip across America, so that he could explain to them the truth about how workers prospered under a free economy. ...

While Ronald Reagan stood firm in his opposition to Communist expansion and imperialism, his personal diplomacy and his relationship with Gorbachev were major factors in shaping the forces that ultimately led to the end of the Cold War, with victory for the cause of freedom.

Once again, George Bush proves he is no Ronald Reagan.