When it comes to foreign policy, President Obama can't seem to
win. Critics correctly point to how his efforts to draw red lines have become
an international joke. And even his success at toppling dictators, or his efforts
to help the "reformists," whoever they are, have all had adverse
unintended consequences. Indeed, the Arab Spring he helped nurture has
witnessed widespread violence on an unprecedented scale. Chaos now reigns!
However, the fact that many of Obama's political opponents call
for more boots on the ground and a concerted effort to "eradicate" ISIS
shows that the president is not alone in his advocacy of irrational
policies. George Bush's ground war in
the Middle East proved, if nothing else, that we can't "nation build"
in the Middle East. The Muslim culture, their institutions, and even the people
themselves, educated in religious schools to hate all Infidels, are not able to
develop the ordered society needed for peace and prosperity. History proves
this--their culture and their nations have stagnated, strangled by the Inman's adherence
to Sharia law, backward-looking observers for the last 1,000 years, while the
West grew prosperous and free. They are
still in a tribal culture, something Europeans left behind thousands of years
ago.
Our continued meddling is based on
the concept that we have a strategic interest in the region, or that we have a
duty to stand up for human rights. Hawks compare our failure to solve the
crises disrupting the Middle East to Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler that led
to WWII. But, this is not 1939 when
Hitler and a modern militarized Germany threatened Europe. Perhaps there was a
need to deter Germany then--before they ravaged Europe. However today the
Middle East presents a very different situation. None of the countries are
advanced industrial nations and none have the Blitzkrieg strength, aircraft,
and armored forces that can run over their neighbors--let alone land on the
shores of North America. Plus they are fractured into at least a dozen warring,
tribal sects all set on dominating each other. Germany and Japan were led by a
single leader who could marshal their forces along a consistent and malignant
objective. In the Middle East, tribal and religious factions render national
boundaries irrelevant and create constant insurgencies and horrific terrorist
disruptions. Significantly, they are totally dependent on foreign nations for
their arms and sustenance. They pose little threat to the nations outside the
Middle East. If they have a nuclear factory it can be destroyed by missiles and bombs. Indeed, a true embargo would have them back fighting each other
with clubs and sharpened stones!
It is curious that virtually all
American politicians and pundits argue for some degree of force to wipe out the
terrorist menace. Where are the Doves when you need them? Let's look at what's
happened--all our efforts have failed to bring stability to the region. It seems that
our presence impairs even what internal strength these countries possess. Most
of the Muslim leaders are motivated to do nothing in the hopes we will solve their
problems, and yet they enjoy our failures and resent our interference. It is a
culture we fail to understand. It is very possible that if we disengaged they
would begin to address their own problems. Even if they don't, it's not our problem!
As an inveterate contrarian, I suggest the best answer is that we should
simply get out--totally--remove all Americans, close the Embassies and let them
have at it. Give Israel a free hand to protect themselves. We have no strategic
interest there. It's a hornet nest, the graveyard of civilizations, and our
presence only muddles their conflicts. We don't even know who to help, who are
the good guys, nor how to help them if we did. For over 60 years America has
poured sweat, money, and blood into the Middle East with nothing to show for
it. Hundreds of diplomatic meetings and billions of dollars of hand-outs have
left a consistent record of failure. To continue such a failed effort is
insanity.
