Clarification, and Some History

Firstly, many thanks to Dagoods for entering the conversation and stimulating further contemplation on my part.

I should admit that I may not have connected all the dots in my post “Stamina for Justice”—I am, in fact, a proponent of the Just War theory, in theory, but this is secondary to the original intent behind the post. I wanted to draw attention primarily to the link I included in the body of the article highlighting atrocities committed against women in Iraq. I further wanted to connect these and other such calamities of violence to US involvement, and our government’s need to address them.

Dagoods is correct—numerous nations around the world are guilty of more heinous and frequent humanitarian crimes than Iraq and indicated that, if the US is in Iraq under the auspices of providing humanitarian aid, then our government is most surely guilty of being hypocritical, and, even worse, is using the plight of the Iraqi people like a sheepskin in order to go about more potentially “wolf”-oriented activities. God forbid that it should be so in the future, though we’ve clearly seen plenty of gleaming fangs. However, in saying that the US is “not the world’s babysitter” I hope I find some common ground with my readers. I do not believe it is the task of the United States to operate as the freelance enforcer of human rights standards. By “enforce” I refer to persuasion via military might.

There are better ways to encourage leaders to respect the dignity of life: two of my favorites are diplomacy and economics. While China’s government is grossly guilty of human rights violations, they don’t casually bite their thumbs at such condemnations, because, like the humans they are, they want money. With the Beijing Olympic games coming up, there’s even more pressure for them to shape up, because continued flagrant abuse of their own peoples or religious persecution won’t only give their national image a black eye, but it will have economic consequences.

The relationship between economics and international dynamics cannot be overstated. One of the reasons World War Two occurred was due to the bumbling and vindictive politics behind the Treaty of Versaille, which had devastating effects on Germany’s economy and led a nation to eventually arm itself with military might and, even worse, a grudge from hell. One story goes, during the late twenties, a German woman wen shopping , and inflation was so bad she carried thousands of bills in a picnic basket. A man came up to her, grabbed the basket, and dumped the money before taking off down the street.

Someone must have paid attention to these events because the US could have done about the same thing with Japan after dropping the bomb. True, the surrender agreements stipulated significant restrictions on their military force, but we didn’t hang them out to dry, either. The US government helped rebuild and set the stage for healthy, powerful economy, leading to a much improved relationship with our samurai friends.

I hope what happened in Japan serves as something for a model for future US involvement in Iraq. While I’m sure I would be glad for another global business partner, the other truth is that a robust economy offers jobs to the Iraqi people—jobs that offer money and a new way of life, new communities, new opportunities for education and to escape the cycles of violence. As it is, terrorist cells, like gangs in LA, call out to young Iraqis with the promise of fellowship and, even, a “purpose driven life.”

I won’t endorse any politician whose goal is to turn Iraq into a parking lot. But in thinking long term about our relationship with the Middle East, helping Iraq rebuild itself, the way we did with Japan, seems a compelling strategy to divert potential terrorists and actually give Iraqis the “freedom” that our president promised them; freedom to learn, to work, to be thoughtful, to live in peace. But I believe this requires the continued presence of our military to safeguard setting the foundation for rebuilding. To this day, Japan and Germany are homes away from home for many servicemen, though their mission descriptions have changed over the decades. I think their presence in these countries has had a positive influence on our diplomatic relationships. Totally positive? Of course not. I need no reminders of the MANY ways the US has betrayed its neighbors, and I know that, in reality, we seldom have the right to claim the moral higher ground. It could be that diplomacy may have proved itself several years ago, if our president had tarried. I prayed for Saddam Hussein to have a “road to Damascus” experience. But now, we are in the middle of the mess, and leaving poses more consequences than, as our leader is wont to say, “staying the course.” I am, as always, open to correction.