Tough love
From ABC,
With Iran seemingly rejecting the end-of-year deadline for making diplomatic progress with the West, and the Chinese government continuing to voice opposition to imposing additional sanctions in the United Nations Security Council against the rogue regime, the Obama administration has been preparing other possible additional ways of sanctioning Iran for its pursuit of nuclear weapons, ABC News has learned.
Other possible additional sanctions?
Oh yes, we’ve seen the effectiveness of those, throughout history, haven’t we?
It seems to me that, for diplomacy to truly function properly, all parties involved must desire it so. But, perhaps I’m too linear in my approach…
Filed under: Foreign Policy • Iran • Rusty
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
And lo, these seven years after invading Afghanistan and Iraq, we’ve seen the effectiveness of a military response to rogue regimes, too. Hundreds of billions of dollars (trillions?) spent and no peaceable and sustainable end in sight.
Perhaps we could agree that we would do well to think through, as a world, how best to deal with rogue regimes and come up with some practical, realistic approaches – with the realization that those, too, will be flawed.
It seems to me that, for diplomacy to truly function properly, all parties involved must desire it so. But, perhaps I’m too linear in my approach…
One of the tenets of nonviolent direct action is that all parties have their self-interest at heart. Diplomacy is the art of making a group see how it is in their best interest to cooperate with the desired outcomes.
For less than rational and rogue-ish types, the threat of violence against their people is often not a huge incentive to cooperate, in fact, it serves their best interest to be belligerent against such threats. We need to wage peace in a smarter way than we wage war if we hope to be most effective.
I agree, Dan, those who are rational and not rogue-ish would be those with whom we could negotiate (ref. the entire Cold War experience with the USSR). Unfortunately, it is the less than rational and rogue-ish types we must be most wary of and, as history and common sense has shown, not expect to be trusted. Consider,
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091222/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_nuclear
How much should we expect to pay, and in what manner, to keep nuclear weapons out of Iran’s hands? Or, do we, as some suggest, simply trust them to manage a nuclear stockpile on their own?
Yes, we must be wary of the less rational and rogue-ish. But history has shown that threats of violence is not the way to keep them in line, as it gives them the chance to stand up against the “imperialists” and lends them credence and support. We need to marginalize such people, not lend them support.
We do so, it seems to me, when we threaten their people with violence (per Iran) or when we try to hire thuggish puppet regimes (per Saddam, Pinochet, etc).
No, we need to organize and get smarter about how we handle such situations. Threats of violence are not a great disincentive.
Dan,
OK, so … threats and violence don’t keep them in line and neither do sanctions … and the actors in play are not stupid. Sooooo what’s left? Your rosy thoughts are going to somehow make things better? Give up? What are you suggesting?
Just peacemaking. Read all about it.
“Nonviolent direct action, cooperative conflict resolution, economic justice, human rights, transition to democracy from below–these are all practices of the new ethic of just peacemaking. They are bringing healing where there was injustice and dictatorship–without making war.” ~Glen Stassen
source
More sources:
source
[This link connects to a pdf with much good information from Jewish, Christian and Muslim perspectives]
source
source
source
Historically, Nonviolent Direct Action has been used to successfully stop oppression in S. Africa, in India, in Latin America and other places. It has a track record of success (and failure, to be sure – but then, so does war). Are you unfamiliar with instances where NVDA has been successfully used?
Unless S. Africa, India and those Latin American countries were as irrational a rouge-ish as the current government in Iran, you haven’t really answered the question. I haven’t personally read the links just yet, but if you can name one country, in the mold of Iran, where it worked, I’d be all ears.
In how many nations, in the mold of Iran, has war-making worked?
Iraq? Hundreds of billions of dollars and six years and not yet.
Afghanistan? Hundreds of billions of dollars and about eight years and not yet.
How many resources have we devoted to war-making solutions? (answer: Trillions of dollars)
How many resources have we devoted to peace-making solutions? (answer: Much less)
In reality, places like Sudan, Rwanda, Iran, Iraq, etc, are tough situations with no good answers, most likely. I’m suggesting we’d be smarter to quit putting most of our eggs (and dollars) in the war-making basket.
If you want peace, you must prepare for it and work for it and plan for it. If most of your tools are hammers, most of your solutions will be hammer-based. We need to devote more energy to more diverse solutions. That’s what I’m saying. There are many good examples and ideas in those pages I’ve linked to. Check them out.
And what is different about Iran than, say, the contra terrorists? Than white South Africans? Are you saying that White Africans and Latin Americans can be reasoned with but Persians can’t? Surely not.
“I am one of those who believe that there is no permanent home for even a section of the Bantu in the white area of South Africa and the destiny of South Africa depends on this essential point. If the principle of permanent residence for the black man in the area of the white is accepted then it is the beginning of the end of civilisation as we know it in this country.”
“I am sick and tired of the hollow parrot-cry of “Apartheid!” I’ve said many times that the word “Apartheid” means good neighbourliness.”
[“Apartheid” means literally, “apart-ness.”]
“Most blacks are happy, except those who have had other ideas pushed into their ears.”
~PW Botha, South African Prime Minister
Yea, that’s a rational, non-roguish guy. He, who apparently was behind the bombing of a church.
As awful as that accusation was, and as blinded by racism as Botha was, are you seriously not seeing the difference in degree between that and threatening to wipe Israel off the map, all the while building a weapon that could potentially, actually, do it?