The Prime Directive:
Dude! This isn't the Land of Tribbles!
The contradiction pits the liberal ideal that discourages impinging on the autonomy of others against the liberal ideal that no people ought to be governed without their consent.
Now, this is very likely taken out of context, but Kaplan's piece requires a (paid!) subscription to TNR, which I don't have and haven't thought much about getting.
Is it not a given that you cannot have autonomy without consent?
If the "others" have autonomy, then they would be governed by their consent and need no impinging on their autonomy.
If the "others" do not have autonomy, then they would not be governed by their consent and any impingement would not be on their autonomy, but those who have taken it away from them.
Am I missing something?