Ever since Barack Obama announced his intentions to run for US president, he was seen as a mere effigy of former President Jimmy Carter. Parallels were drawn linking their message, charisma and persona. As Obama undertook change and initiated more programs, thereby expanding government, he looked more like Carter. Even those that were skeptical of the comparison shockingly agreed when it came to the current administration’s foreign policy approach – particularly when it came to Israel. As Obama reinvented himself and shifted positions on his Middle East policy, he largely rid this conception. Yet, as the tension in Egypt rises with the only Arab ally in the Middle East in flames, the Carter image is back to haunt him.

When Barack Obama ran for president, he was criticized by many in both parties as purely naive. His approach was criticized as immature and dangerous. He proposed dialogue with those that supported terror and believed that “As-Salamu Alaykum” will solve our problems amongst the radical Jihadists. As his presidency settled and his honeymoon ended he soon realized that his rhetoric was indeed naiveté. He abandoned the closure of Guantanamo and continued Bush’s war in Afghanistan. But as we see history repeating itself in Egypt with radical extremists taking over a pro-American country, questions linger whether Obama’s naiveté led to this chapter – an episode that will remain as a flaw in US history.

Jimmy Carter initiated a policy to create democracies around the world with a plea for “human rights”. This call led him to call on the Shah to relinquish power of Iran and release Islamic terrorists from prison. Those prisoners led the revolution which eventually turned Iran into a fundamentalist state; one that is anti-democracy and anti-American. This was a direct result of Carter’s indecisiveness and abandonment of the Shah. It was the defining moment for Carter that ended his career and placed his legacy in shambles.

Ronald Regan strongly advocated for democracy around the world. He led the war against communism and pushed for more freedom around the world. It was under his watch that much of Europe turned toward democracy and remained subsequently. However, he took a different and effective approach. He understood that a dictator cannot and should not be replaced with another authoritarian that’s singing the tune of democracy. He pushed for true democracy where freedom would reign and the people would be in charge forever.

George W. Bush also called for democracy in the Middle East and Egypt when he said that they “should show the way toward democracy in the Middle East.” Barack Obama took a direct swipe at Bush at the largely publicized Cairo speech when he said: “I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other.” Today many question why Obama didn’t foresee this revolution and whether it would be avoided had he pushed for more democracy in the region.

As chaos brewed in Tunisia and expanded to Egypt, the protestors showed that a totalitarian government cannot exist for too long. As the protestors called for Mubarak’s resignation the Obama administration was wavering. Gibbs declared that it was “not for me or our government to determine” as the uprising escalated. However, behind the scenes Obama pressured Mubarak to resign as it met with the opposition. As the US reexamined its relationship with Muslim Brotherhood, a group that supported Hitler and continues opposing America and Israel, it troubles many that fear for another tyranny state in the Middle East. While many Republicans called for Mubarak’s resignation, they don’t want to replace him with another tyrant simply under the name of democracy. Democracy isn’t the choice to elect another dictator; it’s a recipe for destruction.

A terrorist state in Egypt is troubling. An Islamic government in Egypt immediately threatens Israel and the west. It won’t take them thirty years to become a nuclear power; they will be a major power instantly. Although Mubarak has no immediate future – being that tensions will continue to rise and the violence will escalate leading to the ousting of Mubarak – we must ensure that his successor is a moderate of some sort and one that has our support. This moment is Obama’s Carter moment; Obama will be remembered as the one that held discussions with terrorists and supported their takeover of a pro-American ally.

Dave Hirsch is an orthodox Jewish political analyst and columnist. His opinions were featured in numerous newspapers and publications. He can be reached at [email protected]

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)