|
US foreign policy is in crisis mode. Here is some of the evidence that leads to this conclusion:
- Trust of the United States by those abroad has fallen to record lows. This erodes the goodwill we must depend on in times of crisis.
- The era of nuclear nonproliferation is collapsing—or has collapsed—and we appear helpless to do anything about it.
- Nations we have deemed to be "evil" are rushing to arm themselves against us, with everything from nuclear weapons to suicidal young people. There is no end in sight.
This is not the road to peace and security. So how did we get here? Below are a few of our current fear-based policies that reveal how the breakdown in international relations is fueled by this approach. They are marked by hypocrisy, arrogance and revenge, all of which undermine our role in the world.
- We cheered when Saddam Hussein was sentenced to death for killing Kurds with chemical weapons. But it was the US that provided him with chemical weapons to use against the Iranians when he was at war with them. Only if Saddam's crime was that of killing the wrong people with chemical weapons, i.e., not the ones the US wanted killed, can our part in his crime be overlooked.
- We condemn the development of nuclear weapons by Iran and North Korea. But soon after coming into office, the Bush administration renounced this nation's nuclear non-proliferation obligations and began to again develop nuclear weapons technology. What moral legitimacy do we have to complain when we are doing the very thing we complain about?
- In the name of protecting the security of US citizens, the US attacked Iraq with a massive military force and a destructive capacity that was called "Shock and Awe." Now we watch the news reports of how the security of the entire Middle East, if not the world, has been jeopardized by our actions.
- This administration adopted a policy called "preemptive war." It appears to mean that we will go to war if we have enough fear about the intentions of our enemies to, in our minds, justify war. This has stirred fear among those whom we call our enemies, and they are rushing to defend themselves against us with bigger and better weapons, many of which were first developed by the US.
This is what fear-based public policy looks like when applied to the realm of foreign policy.
To have good neighbors we must be a good neighbor. Positive public policy, being an approach in which the needs of all parties are given consideration, is the most powerful tool U.S. foreign policy could employ for achieving peace and security for the American people. Here are some examples of positive foreign policy:
- In order to stop the spread of nuclear arms, the US actively leads the world toward nuclear disarmament, moving from dual morality to monomorality. We declare these weapons of massive death and destruction to be unacceptable in every quarter of the globe, including our own. No breach of any type warrants a destructive response of this magnitude.
- We are honest in the language we use. When crimes are committed by a group of individuals, we call it "crime" and not "war," for war involves other nation states. For example, declaring a "war on terrorism" is a play on words that obscures the truth. Using terrorism is a tactic, like using pontoon bridges is a tactic. A war against pontoon bridges makes no more sense than a war against terrorism. To fight the crime of terrorism, we need effective international police action to prevent future attacks by ferreting out terrorist cells that hide among us. Because those who want to use terrorist tactics to harm us can only do so if they are hiding among us, using the tools of war to combat them, such as bombs and massive armies, is irrational.
- We take a holonomous approach to all foreign policy issues. This means we always look at events in a broader context before deciding how best to respond. For example, most of the men involved in carrying out 9-11 were from Saudi Arabia. If you ask, "What was the US doing in Saudi Arabia that could have incited such action against us?" you must consider the fact that US military bases had been build in Saudi Arabia in conjunction with the first Gulf War. Many in Saudi Arabia considered this immoral, an affront to Allah, because the most holy Muslim site, Mecca, is in Saudi Arabia. After 9-11, those US bases were quietly removed from Saudi Arabia and put elsewhere. Did their plan work?
There are moments in history when we are presented with a fork in the road, an opportunity to make a clear choice between love and fear. One such opportunity came with the end of the Cold War. The vast resources that were made available by the end of that conflict with the USSR could have been invested in providing education for our people, health care for those without it, in developing life-supporting technology, cleaning up the environment, and by sharing that wealth with nations in need.
Instead that "peace dividend" was squandered on choosing the path of fear, investing instead in an illusory dream of making the world safe through US military domination. See the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) below. Our peace dividend was spent on a massive US military build-up when no major enemy threatened us. Now, facing a growing number of enemies is the harvest our fear has forced us to reap.
Jonathan Schell described our perilous circumstances well in his book, The Unconquerable World:
The elements of the danger are obvious. They are not, as before, the massed conventional armies and systematized hatreds of rival great powers. They are the persistent and steady spread of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, the unappeased demons of national, ethnic, religious, and class fury, and I believe, the danger that the world's greatest power, the United States, responding disproportionately and unwisely to these realities, will pursue the Augustan path of force and empire. These elements could, at some unforeseeable point of intersection, bring an explosion, some nuclear 1914 or anthrax 1914, that would send history off the rails as irremediably as the guns of August did almost a hundred years ago. . . . These dark prospects require that we step back from the emergencies of the moment and ask whether there is another path. (2003, 8.)
Is there an alternative? Yes, the American people can join forces and demand a better way. Meta United is dedicated to helping us do that, by building a bridge from the world of fear-based public policy to positive public policy. Continuing to act with fear as our guide is a choice to self-destruct; proceeding on the path of love will leave our children and grandchildren a better world than we have known.
The Cold War, Old and New
The Cold War was the nuclear weapons standoff between the US and the Soviet Union that spanned most of the second half of the 20th century. During this time, the two super powers, the US and the USSR, held each other at bay by continuously having nuclear weapons targeted at the other. That Cold War ended with the fall of the Soviet Union.
The 20th century Cold War is being replaced by a new 21st century version in which additional nations seek to hold the US at bay by acquiring nuclear weapons. They may be aimed at our allies, not us, but the result is that the world is becoming progressively less secure for all people. Life and the use of nuclear weapons are mutually exclusive choices.
The US is fueling this new Cold War by having begun again to develop nuclear weapons technology. The US must return to its role as a leader in nuclear disarmament, for the present course renders us all unsafe and more insecure than ever.
Project for the New American Century (PNAC)
To read the plan for US domination of the world using our military after the end of the Cold War, go to the report by Project for the New American Century (PNAC) entitled Rebuilding America's Defenses, Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century, dated September, 2000. Many of those instrumental in developing this plan were given high-level positions in the Bush administration when it entered office in 2001.
|
