Was it a cosmic coincidence that Jeane Kirkpatrick and Augusto Pinochet died within days of one another? (I'll skip the nearly obligatory comment about a post-earthly reunion.) Given all the flattering obits the former UN ambassador received, the final departure of the Chilean dictator was a timely reminder that Kirkpatrick cozied up to murderers and torturers. In fact, she provided the Reagan administration--in which she served--with the theoretical framework for bear-hugging brutes.

In a famous--or infamous--1979 Commentary article entitled "Dictatorships and Double Standards," Kirkpatrick distinguished between communist dictatorships and "right-wing autocracies," maintaining that the latter were, in a way, less evil, because they could evolve into democracies, while communist totalitarian states could not. Washington, she advised, should not worry so much about human rights abuses within these autocracies. Her argument justified the Reagan cold warrior's embrace of anti-communist, pro-American dictatorships, such as the military juntas ruling Argentina and Chile, the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines, and the apartheid regime in South Africa. Because these repressive governments were merely right-wing autocracies and not left-wing totalitarian regimes, the Reaganites could welcome them into the anti-communist crusade and use them as allies in the struggle against the Soviet Union--no matter what these tyrants did to their own society and citizens.

In Argentina and Chile, the fascistic military dictatorships Kirkpatrick supported slaughtered, disappeared and tortured thousands of citizens of people. As the National Security Archive notes:

A post-junta truth commission found that the Argentine military had "disappeared" at least 10,000 Argentines in the so-called "dirty war" against "subversion" and "terrorists" between 1976 and 1983; human rights groups in Argentina put the number at closer to 30,000.

The Argentina generals were especially fond of torture and had a taste for going after Jews, whom they believed were members of a worldwide communist conspiracy. Yet Kirkpatrick was willing to put this all aside and even attended a dinner--thrown to honor her--at the Argentine embassy in Washington the night Argentina foolishly invaded the Falkland Islands in 1982.

As for Chile, the Reagan administration and Kirkpatrick treated Pinochet, who overthrew an elected president, as a friend, even though Pinochet's thugs murdered thousands and tortured tens of thousands.

The Washington Post noted Pinochet's brutality in its front-page report of his demise. Yet its obituary of Kirkpatrick whited-out her fancy for murderous leaders like Pinochet and the Argentine generals. It described her work as UN ambassador this way:

An influential voice in the development of administration policies toward Central America, Kirkpatrick supported the military junta in El Salvador and was an ardent supporter of anti-Sandinista rebels fighting the leftist Sandinista government of Nicaragua. She helped develop the covert plan to provide $19 million in aid to the contras.

Not a mention of Pinochet and Chile, nothing about her anti-Semitic allies in Argentina.

I seem to recall years ago writing something particularly nasty about Kirkpatrick--words to the effect that she should not be allowed to discuss foreign policy until she had her private parts exposed to electric shock, a common practice employed by the autocrats she supped with. It's customary to speak no ill of the dead. But history never dies. And Kirkpatrick ought to be remembered for all that she accomplished--and all that she defended and enabled.

Posted by David Corn at December 11, 2006 11:44 AM