As I write, the US war machine is winding down its decade-long presence in Iraq where it had gone in search of weapons of mass destruction. This is all thanks to President Barack Obamas campaign promise and commitment since moving into the White House, to shift America into a new gear of constructive engagement with the rest of the world. But by a strange twist of fate, another theatre of war is opening up under Obamas watch and in some ways inspired by him.This new war, though not fought with guns, tanks and bombs, may turn out to be just as fierce as the war on terror. It is the war to secure the rights of lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender persons worldwide. It follows a memo from the US President directing all American federal agencies wherever they may be to defend gay rights and offer sanctuaries for persons persecuted for their sexual orientation. To give bite to its convictions, the US government has set up a $3m Global Equity Fund to support civil society organisations working for the rights of LGBTs.And only last week, the US Senate overwhelmingly approved a bill which may make it legal for US military personnel to engage in homosexuality and intercourse with animals!From jaw-dropping reactions across the globe, it is clear that the rest of the world fears the Americans are beginning to think from their pants. And that any attempt to export these new-found sexual liberties would be considered an affront. Given the huge cultural, ideological and moral issues involved, the US is clearly on a collision course with most countries in Africa, Asia, the Middle East and South America where customs view homosexuality and bestiality with deep contempt. It makes you marvel at the appetite of the American state to stoke controversy. Has the White House merely replaced military aggression with sexual aggression' Does the world need a new conflict around how people may conduct their affairs behind closed doors'With its own domestic economic troubles as well as on-going headaches with Iran, Palestine, North Korea, Pakistan and Afghanistan, among others, one would have thought that the US foreign policy, under Obama, would seek to reduce exposure to conflict, especially on none-core issues, make more friends across the globe and enhance its soft power. This new move appears to work in the very opposite direction.The case for gay rights comes premium-brewed, filtered it seems, by years of fierce debate within the West itself between contending views on the matter. In sum, it presents anti-gay sentiments as a violation of human rights. According to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Being gay is not a Western invention but a human reality. Gay people are born into and belong to every society in the world. They are of all ages, all races, all faiths. They are doctors, and teachers, farmers and bankers, soldiers and athletes In other words, just as the Women and Black civil rights movements before it, gay rights advocacy is positioned as another milestone in the advancement of liberal/democratic ideals for which the US is global champion.This argument is seductive, especially for anyone with liberal leanings. Surely, no one would like to see minorities of any shade victimised for strictly personal choices or for the way they are created. But thats where Washingtons position ceases to be attractive. First, it may be argued that it is patently undemocratic (even authoritarian) for one country or culture to foist its views on anotheras we are about witnessing. Indeed, if democracy is truly about the will of the majority, then, clearly, the US and its pro-gay allies are, at least for now, in a global minority and must respect the sensibilities of the rest of the world.Second, the emerging Western position on sleeping rights is still largely untried and untested even in its societies of origin. With time, it could turn out to be either the best thing since sliced bread or the worst piece of liberal social engineering ever known to man. To globally propagate such a position is like selling a new potentially lethal drug without clinical trials or Food and Drugs Administration approval. Ideally, it should be allowed to take its natural coursesurvive, evolve, thrive or dieon its own merit rather than by the force of cultural imposition or diplomatic arm-twisting. By the way, were animals consulted before they were included on the menu for servicemens erotic pleasures'Secretary Clinton is right; Gay people are born into and belong to every society in the world. But throughout history, mankind has treated their sexuality discreetly and with utmost privacy. By choosing to move gay culture from closet to mainstream, the West may be acting within its rights. But that right stops at the noses of nations and cultures which consider it inappropriatejust as the West did until a few days ago. The right to choose must remain in the hands of each sovereign societynot the US State Department.I consider myself a liberal by any stretch of imagination, but I shudder to think about the day when thieves, robbers, murderers, rapists and arsonists would demand Criminal Protection Rights on the grounds that they are born the way they are, not criminals by choice, and so deserve societys acceptance. They would seek legal cover to openly enlist in the public service (including the police and judiciary) and even run for president. To discuss their criminal orientation, they would argue, would be an infringement on their fundamental human rights. I shudder at the thought of half-human half-beasts, leaping from Greek mythology into modern day reality. I shudder at the thought of strange new diseases ravaging mankind, thanks to this new obsession with the groin. Surely, it takes a strong heart to be liberal and pro-American these days.Anazonwu, a communication strategist and entrepreneur, wrote in from Magodo GRA, Lagos, via vanazon@yahoo.com. 08033271909.
Click here to read full news..
