Obama Signs Belarus Sanctions; Calls Belarus President a "Dictator"

FrankRep

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2007
Messages
28,885
alexanderlukashenko-t.001.jpg



Obama Signs Belarus Sanctions; Calls Belarus President a "Dictator"


Joe Wolverton, II | The New American
09 January 2012


On January 3, President Barack Obama signed into law legislation imposing sanctions on Belarus. The Belarus Human Rights and Democracy Act of 2011 was passed by Congress in December in response to a litany of alleged human rights abuses on the part of the former Soviet Republic.

The text of the act enumerates several causes of the congressional effort to punish Belarus:


The Government of Belarus has engaged in a pattern of clear and uncorrected violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

The Government of Belarus has engaged in a pattern of clear and uncorrected violations of basic principles of democratic governance, including through a series of fundamentally flawed presidential and parliamentary elections undermining the legitimacy of executive and legislative authority in that country.

The Government of Belarus has subjected thousands of pro-democratic political activists to harassment, beatings, and jailings, particularly as a result of their attempts to peacefully exercise their right to freedom of assembly and association.

The Government of Belarus has attempted to maintain a monopoly over the country’s information space, targeting independent media, including independent journalists, for systematic reprisals and elimination, while suppressing the right to freedom of speech and expression of those dissenting from the dictatorship of Aleksandr Lukashenka, and adopted laws restricting the media, including the Internet, in a manner inconsistent with international human rights agreements.

The Government of Belarus continues a systematic campaign of harassment, repression, and closure of nongovernmental organizations, including independent trade unions and entrepreneurs, and this crackdown has created a climate of fear that inhibits the development of civil society and social solidarity.

The Government of Belarus has subjected leaders and members of select ethnic and religious minorities to harassment, including the imposition of heavy fines and denying permission to meet for religious services, sometimes by selective enforcement of the 2002 Belarus religion law.

The Government of Belarus has attempted to silence dissent by persecuting human rights and pro-democracy activists with threats, firings, expulsions, beatings and other forms of intimidation, and restrictions on freedom of movement and prohibition of international travel.​


The indictment extends to the country’s president, Alexander Lukashenko (Romanized spelling, pictured above), labeling him a “dictator” and accusing him of "establish[ing] himself in power by orchestrating an illegal and unconstitutional referendum that enabled him to impose a new constitution, abolishing the duly elected parliament, the 13th Supreme Soviet, installing a largely powerless National Assembly, extending his term in office, and removing applicable term limits."

As punishment for these offenses against the civil and human rights of the citizens of Belarus, the newly enacted law imposes sanctions which require the United States to investigate Belarus' arms deals and its possible censorship of the Internet, as well as a refusal to issue travel visas to several Belarusian officials.

One of the more onerous sanctions (likely unintentionally so) instructs the government of the United States to, "continue to work closely with the European Union and other countries and international organizations, to promote the conditions necessary for the integration of Belarus into the European family of democracies...."

Mandating membership in the European Union may be the kiss of death for targeted officials in the small Eastern European nation.

Curiously, there is not a word in the new law indicating where in the Constitution is found authorization for the Congress or President of the United States to compel other nations to join international organizations, particularly ones so dysfunctional as the EU.

A report in Jurist on the President’s signing of the slate of sanctions relates a few of the events that may have precipitated the passing of the bill:


In November a Belarus court convicted human rights activist Ales Bialiatski, the president of Viasana and vice-president of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), of tax evasion, sentencing him to a four-and-a-half-year prison term amid international criticism. In September UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay suggested a need for UN intervention in Belarus and demanded the nation free non-violent political prisoners. Her report also cited Belarus as the only European nation to still enforce the death penalty. Ambassador Mikhail Khvostov said his country disagrees with the UN on what constitutes a peaceful demonstration and that Belarus is committed to human rights.​


Despite the strong language of the official rebuke, provisions of the new law establish that it is the intent of the United States "to remain open to reevaluating its policy toward Belarus as warranted by demonstrable progress made by the government of Belarus.”

Regardless of the veracity of the charges leveled by the United States against the government of Belarus, there is something redolent of stones being thrown by those living in glass houses when it comes to Barack Obama branding another president a “dictator.”

There are few more dictatorial acts than the signing of a law granting to oneself the absolute power to deploy armed military units to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens upon a mere suspicion of being a “military threat” to the security of the homeland. Then, once the suspect is imprisoned, denying him access to an attorney or information related to the crimes with which he is ostensibly being charged. Both provisions are violative of core constitutional liberties.

That sort of power sounds very dictatorial, indeed.

Furthermore, how can a nation that passes laws such as the one described above (the National Defense Authorization Act) appoint itself as the worldwide guardian of self-government and human rights?


SOURCE:
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/fo...anctions-calls-belarus-president-a-qdictatorq
 
HR 515, Belarus Democracy and Human Rights Act of 2011. It passed by Voice Vote, Rand did NOT call for a vote.

Passed Senate December 14th.
 
Last edited:
For fuck's sake, is this gonna be the 7th war this nutcase has started?????

Obama has no idea WTF he is doing with regard to foreign policy.
 
He's not controlling the policy. Merely putting a smile on for the cameras and dictating those policies with strings pulling all of his movements.

For fuck's sake, is this gonna be the 7th war this nutcase has started?????

Obama has no idea WTF he is doing with regard to foreign policy.
 
I find it absolutely ludicrous that this administration doesn't realize (or they do and are absolutely hypocritical) that they are doing almost the exact same thing.

Anyway, United States turned Belarus into what it is at the moment so of course, another blowback scenario. We just can't help but intervene in others countries' affairs.
 
1%. Under.
i say .05%. Under.


I find it absolutely ludicrous that this administration doesn't realize (or they do and are absolutely hypocritical) that they are doing almost the exact same thing.

Anyway, United States turned Belarus into what it is at the moment so of course, another blowback scenario. We just can't help but intervene in others countries' affairs.

but america is the force of good fighting the evil in this world!!
 
It ain't just Obama. It's also a unanimous vote in the Senate and House. Technically a voice vote. Nobody called for an official vote.
 
oh my gosh, guys. read the bill!!! good lord!

The Government of Belarus has restricted freedom
of expression on the Internet by requiring Internet Service
Providers to maintain data on Internet users and the sites
they view and to provide such data to officials upon request,
and by creating a government body with the authority to
require Internet Service Providers to block Web sites.

considering SOPA..this is just cherry!!

edit:
After the December 19, 2010, presidential election
the Government of Belarus responded to opposition protests
by beating scores of protestors and detaining more than 600
peaceful protestors.

i can't stop laughing at the horror!!
 
Last edited:
Shocking, from http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/R?r112:FLD001:H04633:

Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the ``Belarus Democracy Act''

Couldn't find anything else on it, but Ron spoke out against it on the floor.

Found the full text:

Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the ``Belarus Democracy Act'' reauthorization. This title of this bill would have amused George Orwell, as it is in fact a U.S. regime-change bill. Where does the United States Congress derive the moral or legal authority to determine which political parties or organizations in Belarus--or anywhere else--are to be U.S.-funded and which are to be destabilized? How can anyone argue that U.S. support for regime-change in Belarus is somehow ``promoting democracy''? We pick the parties who are to be supported and funded and somehow this is supposed to reflect the will of the Belarusian people? How would Americans feel if the tables were turned and a powerful foreign country demanded that only a political party it selected and funded could legitimately reflect the will of the American people?

I would like to know how many millions of taxpayer dollars the U.S. government has wasted trying to overthrow the government in Belarus. I would like to know how much money has been squandered by U.S. government-funded front-organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy, the International Republic Institute, Freedom House, and others meddling like the old Soviet Union in the internal politics of a country that has neither threatened nor attacked the United States. It is the arrogance of our foreign policy and we call it ``democracy.'' We wonder why we are no longer loved and admired overseas.

Finally, I strongly object to the sanctions that this legislation imposes on Belarus. We must keep in mind that sanctions and blockades of foreign countries are considered acts of war. Do we need to continue war-like actions yet another country? Can we afford it.

I wish to emphasize that I take this position not because I am in support of the regime in Belarus, or anywhere else. I take this position because it is dangerous folly to be the Nation that arrogates to itself the right to determine the leadership of the rest of the world. As we teeter closer to bankruptcy, it should be more obvious that we need to change our foreign policy to one of constructive engagement rather than hostile interventionism. And though it scarcely should need to be said, I must remind my colleagues today that we are the U.S. House of Representatives, and not some sort of world congress. We have no constitutional authority to intervene in the wholly domestic affairs of Belarus or any other sovereign nation.

What a stud
 
Last edited:
Back
Top