Just weeks after Donald Trump returned to power in Washington, his Vice-President JD Vance delivered a stunning speech in Germany.
“In Britain and across Europe,” Vance told his gobsmacked audience at the Munich Security Conference, “free speech, I fear, is in retreat”.
He told delegates the allies had won the Cold War because they “defended democracy” while the Soviet Union “censored dissidents, closed churches [and] cancelled elections”.
How ironic then that the new administration in Washington has proven to be anything but tolerant of alternative viewpoints.
“They [the Soviet bloc] lost because they neither valued nor respected all of the extraordinary blessings of liberty, the freedom to surprise, to make mistakes, to invent,” he said. “Unfortunately, when I look at Europe today, it’s sometimes not clear what happened to some of the Cold War winners.”
The source of his grievance are measures the EU is taking against the use of social media to spread hate and misinformation. These are seen by Vance, tech billionaire Elon Musk and their fellow travellers as “digital censorship”.
This, Vance said, “looks like old, entrenched interests ... who simply don’t like the idea that somebody with an alternative viewpoint might express a different opinion… or win an election”.
By contrast, under Trump’s leadership, “we may disagree with your view, but we will fight to defend your right to offer it in the public square, agree or disagree”.
How ironic then that the new administration in Washington has proven to be anything but tolerant of alternative viewpoints.
From restricting the Associated Press’s access to the Oval Office — because the news agency refuses to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America” — to moves to deport a Palestinian-born student activist who holds unwelcome opinions on Gaza, the “leader of the free world” is looking less than convincing as a champion of free speech.
Ebrahim Rasool, declared persona non grata this month, clearly overstepped the diplomatic mark in his criticism of Trump. But were his remarks so egregious they required expulsion?
To give some perspective, in October 2018 Saudi-born journalist Jamal Khashoggi was killed in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, Turkey. Khashoggi, who had been living in the US, was, according to intelligence provided to the US government, killed and dismembered by Saudi agents.
Trump, during his first stint as president, described Riyadh’s role in the murder “as the worst cover-up in history”. But the US did not demand that the Saudi ambassador to Washington should leave.
Even if the argument is that Rasool was expelled for what he personally did or said, as opposed to something done by the country he represents, the US reaction is out of proportion.
It is not as if no US envoy has ever made a statement deemed offensive by the host nation. Richard Grenell, ambassador to Germany, tweeted on his first day in the office: “US sanctions will target critical sectors of Iran’s economy. German companies doing business with Iran should wind down operations immediately.”
Insulted as they felt, the Germans didn’t send Grenell packing.
Nor did the Netherlands expel Trump appointee Pete Hoekstra, who offended many Dutch citizens when he visited a cemetery where Nazi soldiers are buried and then posted on social media: “Walked among the graves at Ysselsteyn, a cemetery for German soldiers… A terrible reminder of the cost of going to war and why we must always work towards peace.”
There are numerous other examples, including our own Lady R debacle in which Reuben Brigety accused the country of selling weapons to Russia. Brigety never provided evidence for his claims.
The major challenge is how to navigate a relationship over the next four years – or longer if Vance succeeds Trump — with a US that is becoming increasingly intolerant.
Now Trump has picked Brent Bozell as the next US ambassador to South Africa, extolling him as someone who “brings fearless tenacity, extraordinary experience and vast knowledge to a nation that desperately needs it”.
Since free speech here is certainly not in retreat, Bozell faces no threat of being ejected for his opinions. South Africa can only hope, however, that he has a thick skin because he is sure to find the environment more robust than in Trump’s America.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.