Memorial Day during Wartime Reminds of the Need for Vigilance

As we ought to do on every Memorial Day, we honor with gratitude those who sacrificed their lives in service to the United States in wartime for the blessings of our security and liberty. This Memorial Day, we also recall those who recently died in service during the current, though mostly paused, Iranian War. The minor war is the latest in a series of direct clashes with the Islamic Republic of Iran since the Iranian Revolution in 1979 brought to power a Shi’ite Muslim theoracy committed to spreading Islamist revolution by any means, including throug state sponsorship of terrorism. Iran has engaged in a proxy war with the U.S. through its support of terrorists and guerillas that have attacked Americans. Regardless of the lack of fitness of the current Commander in Chief, who had dodged the draft through fraud; his failure to plan for contingencies like the Iranian closure of the Strait of Hormuz; his lack of clear and consistent policy principles to form the basis of negotiation demands; his repetition of others’ errors in allowing the Iranians to buy time by extendig negotiations and cease-fires; and his inadequate briefing of Congress, the sacrifice of our troops who gave their lives or who have been injured or who are currently risking their safety to confront the Iranian menace should no less be appreciated. The current service of our troops in this conflict, like the sporadic engagements elsehwere in the War on Terrorism against Sunni Islamist terrorists, such as al-Qaeda, which was responsible for the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks on American that killed a record 3,000 people, and their offshoot, the Islamic States, remind us of the need for eternal vigilance. Even though the U.S. is a superpower, there are threats of various kind from around the world from evil forces who recognize America is a force for good that is an obstacle to their designs. May God bless America and keep it safe and free, and may we remain ever grateful to those who sacrificed their lives.

The Center Right Takes Power in Hungary

Conservative Peter Magyar was sworn in as Prime Minister of Hungary yesterday, ending 16 years of rule by the autocratic, corrupt, pro-Russian far right Fidesz Party. Magyar’s center-right Tisza Party, which holds over two-thirds of the seats in Parliament, is a member of the European People's Party group in the European Parliament. Fidesz had been forced out of the EPP because of its violation of the group’s principles of liberty and representative government, as I had posted. The EPP leads the coalition that governs the European Union. As I had posted last month, the overwhelming victory by the conservatives overcame Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s usual restrictions on free and fair elections, such as limitations on access to public media, as well as open support by the European and American far right, such as by far-right and fascist party leaders, Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance. Orban was regarded as a model by the far right, as I have posted, despite -- or perhaps because of -- the autocracy and corruption, and lack of prosperity. The self-described “nationalists” and “sovereigntists” sympathize with aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine and admire Russian tyrant Vladimir Putin, the former Soviet intelligence agent who is trying to restore the Soviet Empire. Tisza’s convincing victory also effectively precluded any attempt by Orban to challenge the results. As I have posted, Hungary is the latest example of a trend in Europe of the center right defeating the far right in elections to lead government coalitions while also keeping the far left from power. Poland, Austria, Romania, Germany and the EU were the other examples. In other examples, center-right parties at least form part of a coalition that keeps out both extremes, such as in France, or, like in Italy, help to moderate the policies of a more right-wing government. Center-right parties rule in multiple other States around Europe and the world, but the point I have observed is that the success of the center right suggests that a principled conservative party could form a viable alternative to the extremes, even in America, or at least that a center-right Republican nominee could again appeal to enough voters while turning the GOP back to its conservative mooring.

Foreign Digest: Mali and Iran

Mali: Russian mercenaries supported by the Kremlin were forced by Islamist terrorists to retreat last week from Kidal, one of the three main cities in northern Mali. The terrorist and guerilla rebels are affiliates of al-Qaeda, the terrorist organization responsible for the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks on America. As I have posted, there was a series of military coups in West Africa in Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger, that were justified by the coup leaders on the basis that the previous governments were ineffective against the Islamist insurgency. The West African States switched their alliance from the West, forcing out French and American troops, to Russia, but have been no more effectivene against the terrorists, as I have posted. Russia also has sent mercenaries to the Central African Republic and Sudan. As in Ukraine, they commit human rights abuses everywhere they go, just like the Russian Federation, led by tyrant Vladimir Putin. Iran: Although the more hardline isolationist Trumpists are opposed to the Trump Administration’s military operation against the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear weapon program, others are rightly justifying it on the basis that “Iran has been at war with us for 47 years” since the Iranian Revolution in 1979, as I have observed. The reference is to Iran’s confrontation with the United States in one form or another, directly or indirectly, such as hostage-taking, sponsoring terrorists and guerillas who have attacked Americans, or even military clashes. The U.S. and the Islamic Republic have been engaged in combat since 1988, in sporadic campaigns or incidents. But the pro-war Trumpists are thus rightly contradicting the false statement that they repeat from the professional media that the Afghan War was “the longest in American history.” As I have noted, the Afghan War was a major war from 2001-2002, and then a minor war thereafter, dwindling to a non-combat advisory and training mission the last several years before the disastrous Trump-Biden withdrawal in 2021, for a total of 20 years. The U.S. had overthrown the Afghan Taliban de facto regime because it has harbored al-Qaeda’s leadership, which the Americans decimated, but the Taliban returned to power immediately upon the American and allied withdrawal. Even counting the entire Aghan War, which was the first major battle of the overall Global War on Terrorism, as a major war, labeling it the longest would be based on a false comparison. As I observed, the Korean War lasted as a major war from 1950 to 1953, but Communist North Korea continued to clash military with the U.S. sporadically until 1985, for a total of 35 years, as the two Koreas have remained legally at war and often have clashed with each other. Moreover, a reasonable argument could be made that the Cold War was a series of major and minor wars with international Communism, including with the Soviet Union directly at times, from 1946-1991 that were battles, like the Korean War, instead of a series of discrete wars. The Americans clashed with the Libyan dictatorship of Muammar Qaddafi sporadically for 30 years from 1981 to 2011. Furthermore, I note the U.S. has occasionally engaged in combat with terrorists in Libya for many years since. But the U.S.-Iranian conflict has exceeded even both of these conflicts at 38 years and counting. As with Afghanistan after the overthrow of the Taliban in 2002, these wars were sporadic, with gaps of years or even decades between incidents. But the point is that even Trumpists admit that the Afghan War was not the longest war. Furthermore, the complaint by isolationists on the left and far right about “endless” and “forever” wars acknowledges the persistence of enemies such as Islamists like the Iranian regime, more than constituting a legitimate criticism of continued American vigilance against this mortal threat. Complaining about the fight against Islamists as endless represents a lack of understanding of the enemy’s determination and is akin to complaining about crime or piracy as never-ending. Indeed, the U.S. has been combatting jihadists for over 200 years since the Barbary Wars with the Arab Islamist North Africans who were demanding the payment of tribute from merchant vessels. The U.S. defeat of the Barbary Pirates established the principle of freedom of navigation, which is the same principle currently at stake with Iran’s current actions choking off the Strait of Hormuz and demanding tribute. As I have noted during the War on Terrorism, Islamists can and must be defeated, but because Islamism is a religious ideology, it will continue to arise in one form or another and thus necessitates prudent policies and a strong defense.