Inaugural

The President’s Sec­ond Inau­gur­al cheered his polit­i­cal allies and angered his foes.  Those expect­ing a Lin­coln-like sec­ond inau­gur­al (“with mal­ice toward none” ) con­tin­ue to express their dis­ap­point­ment.  They need to get over them­selves.  There is no require­ment that win­ners be gra­cious in sports, pol­i­tics or life.   The Inau­gu­ra­tion was the President’s end­zone dance.  He won and if he wants to cel­e­brate his vic­to­ry by taunt­ing his oppo­nents, that his prerogative.

Tone aside, there was some­thing notice­ably absent from the President’s remarks.  Just a day before he pri­vate­ly took the oath of office, Alger­ian forces brought an end to a ter­ror­ist seizure of a gas field.  The death toll so far is at 66, includ­ing 37 civil­ian work­ers, at least three of whom are Americans.

The tim­ing of these gris­ly events was unfor­tu­nate, con­clud­ing as they did so close to the President’s big cel­e­bra­tion.  An expres­sion of remorse would have been ill-suit­ed to the script White House speech­writ­ers had pre­pared.  Besides, these are corpses, after all, some report­ed­ly charred beyond recog­ni­tion.  There’s plen­ty of time to bury them once their bod­ies have all been recov­ered and trans­port­ed home.  No need to strike a dis­cor­dant note of grief in an oth­er­wise tri­umphant address.

There’s also the fact that we know so lit­tle about the dead or their mur­der­ers.   The attack once again took our lead­ers by sur­prise and near­ly a week after the assault was launched, they seem still to be in the dark as to its most basic details.  No need to embar­rass our­selves as we did after 4 Amer­i­cans were killed in Beng­hazi, announc­ing that their deaths sprang from an imag­i­nary protest against a Youtube video out­side our con­sulate.  Bet­ter to say too lit­tle than to spend months explain­ing how you got it so wrong.

More­over, an expres­sion of con­do­lence to the fam­i­lies of the dead would have been at odds with the President’s dec­la­ra­tion that “endur­ing secu­ri­ty and last­ing peace” do not require “per­pet­u­al war.”  It would have been awk­ward to acknowl­edge that his with­draw­al from the wars begun by his pre­de­ces­sor seems to have pro­duced nei­ther secu­ri­ty nor peace.  Nor have nego­ti­a­tions with our ene­mies “durably lift[ed] sus­pi­cion and fear,” despite the President’s expressed con­vic­tions.  If you are an Amer­i­can civil­ian liv­ing in Africa, Asia or oth­er trou­bled realms, your sus­pi­cions and fears are like­ly more acute after Beng­hazi and Algeria.

That is why a sen­tence or two – per­haps even a phrase – express­ing sym­pa­thy for Amer­i­cans who have died far from the bat­tle­fields of Afghanistan over the past sev­er­al months might have been apt.  Hon­or­ing the dead would at least tell the liv­ing that we are aware of their per­il, even if we don’t intend to do much to relieve it.

The era of per­pet­u­al war may be over.  But sure­ly there is some mid­dle ground between inter­ven­tion and indifference.

Screen shot 2013-02-12 at 2.34.51 PM