Sunday, January 25, 2004

The Essential Nature of Foreign Policy, vis-a-vis Dictators, FDR, and Saddam Hussein
Firstly, just to clear up any misapprehensions, FDR died while Saddam was still a boy. What was the "Good Neighbor Policy?" Simply put, it was a euphimism for cozying up to despots to maintain stability. It was born, in my mind, from America's (then) historical isolationism, and it was strong in both main parties when FDR was elected. World War II, naturally, ended this for a time. Then came the Cold War, where each side could obliterate the other, and yet could not protect itself. When this happens, and its actually quite normal for competing regional (alien humor) interests, the USSR(CCCP) and USA made the "battlefield" the outside their own borders, in converting third party nations to their cause. One of these proxies, who may well have worked for the CIA as early as 1959, but certainly no later than 1963, a young Saddam was an enthusiastic and efficient killer in joint Ba'athist-Nationalist anti-communist hit squads. Most people at the time of the 1963 which briefly brought the Ba'athists to power as CIA-inspired. A long list of the most recent Presidents kept up the reindeer games with his Evilness, up to and including the current President's father. The great, potentially species-ending conflict of an all-out nuclear war (and at least one thing President Eisenhower did could easily have started a small nuclear war, see Bamford's "Body of Secrets" and the polar flyover section) led the United States that we must have as many allies as possible, no matter how savory, not even avoiding the world's worst post world war two dictator). What does this mean? Did America, in stooping so low, lose its moral right to provide an example to the world? The essential nature of foreign policy in the new world is that we no longer have this justification, and, in fact, we undermine oursleves by recent actions to prop up (seemingly) a dozen new dictators to help take down one. Just because we can afford to cozy up to these despots less, hardly means we need then reverse our course and become their conquerors. Stability is in the interests of all of the wealthy people on Earth, wouldn't you guess?

No comments: