"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none..." -Thomas Jefferson
"Instability in trade is one of the prime causes of creating conditions that lead to war." -Ron Paul
How to Stop (or Start) Wars
It seems to me (and a lot of other smart people, see above quotes) that the way to remove war from our midst is to engage in the tradition of open and honest trade with all countries, especially countries that are potential powder kegs of war. The opposite is also true: if you want war, then disrupt trade, prevent the flow of goods across borders and soon armies will go off to the march.
Pope John Paul II championed that form of human relationship called "inter-dependence", where cooperation with one another gave definition to human actions. Interdependence is a mark of our human freedom and frailty: we need each other. Alasdair MacIntyre treated at length this notion of interdependence in his work "Dependent Rational Animals: Why Human Beings Need the Virtues". Interdependence means that we achieve maturity, flourishing and independence only through dependence on others.
Poetically, we can say "No man is an island." This truth of human independence and our inherent need for cooperation is written across every dimension of human existence.
Economically, the division of labor embodies our human interdependence, for no one is sufficient unto themselves to achieve prosperity. Philosophically, we can repeat Aristotle's axiom that "Man is a Social Animal" and it is our nature to be inherently ordered to good relationships with other social animals. Theologically, I believe it is caught up in the Scriptural understanding of the Trinity as God-as-Community-of-Persons and man, male and female, are made in the image of this divine communio personarum. In short, we need each other in order to achieve for ourselves any measure of personal independence and human flourishing.
The same is true when persons gather into communities or governments. As the world grows smaller, we see how each country is increasingly interrelated, interdependent, with one another. The more a nation is isolated from others, the more vulnerable they are to aggression from outside or towards acting aggressively to other nations. Thus, the key to warfare is isolation, to isolate your enemy in as many ways as you possibly can, especially in the court of public opinion.
Apply this to Iran. Right now we are increasing Iranian isolation by placing massive embargos upon their petroleum, not allowing them to ship crude oil to refineries and refusing to deal with anyone who shipped refined oil products to Iran. This effectively isolates the whole populace of Iran with an act of sheer aggression that is a precursor to war.
Rep. Ron Paul had the harshest of comments regarding these sanctions, saying "Sanctions are not diplomacy. They are a precursor to war and an embarrassment to a country that pays lip service to free trade. It is ironic that people who decry isolationism support actions like this."
What do you think is going to be the outcome of embargos and sanctions against a nation, cutting them off from open and honest trade with other nations? There can only be one outcome: the lesser power, now cut off, will begin lashing out violently, chaffing against the fetters that we put them in. The greater power will use these acts of violence as excuses for escalation of war, claiming "unjustified aggression" and demanding other nations support them in their "self-defense." Further entangling alliances are fostered as other nations are dragged deeper into conflict.
Our embargo declares that the US will not do business with any nation that does refined petroleum business with Iran. As the lone superpower in the world today, such an embargo brings the whole world to bare against a single nation, as virtually all of the world is entangled and helpless against this unipolar New World Order.
Just a few years ago during the Clinton presidency when there were sanctions against Iran, the then-former Defense Secretary under George H. W. Bush, who was the then-current CEO of Halliburton, Mr. Dick Cheney, complained against the US government sanctions, saying that they just wanted to engage in commerce with Iran. After Cheney becomes the Vice President with W. he sang an entirely different tune, championing war with the Islamic Republic and an increase to the sanctions.
Since that infamous speech of Bush's calling North Korea, Iran and Iraq the "Axis of Evil" the push to isolate those countries as far as possible was begun. In fact, Iraq was under a decade of sanctions int he 90's with embargoes from the US and the UN and North Korea is, arguably, the most isolated nation on the face of the earth. Coupling Iran with these other two nations was the rhetorical key to war with Iran. Calling them "Holocaust Deniers" and saying they want nukes to drive Israel into the sea, that's the nail in their coffin.
Iran has #2 largest supply of both oil and natural gas. It has great natural wealth, but with the inability to refine their own products, this great wealth is reduced to nothing. Instead of allowing such goods to flow freely across the borders of Iran with the rest of the world, these strategic sanctions will lead to the flood of war sweeping across the Persian nation.
Currently, Iran has no nuclear weapons and has no capacity to produce nuclear weapons (a shocker if you only get your news from FoxNews or CNN), but any reasonable person could see how acquiring nuclear weapons would be desirous of any nation in the position Iran is in, for the US treats nuclear powers in an utterly different way (more non-interventionist) than non-nuclear powers. Consider how the US lobs bombs into Yemen, an extreme Islamic country, but does nothing to our near-and-dear nuclear friend Pakistan, an extreme Islamic country and buddy to Al-Qaeda.
For sheer deterrence, rationally, Iran should be seeking nuclear weapons, if only to tone down the war-shouting rhetoric of American government leaders, talking heads, and the Pentagon. Obviously, no one wants Iran to have nuclear weapons, but if the world's only superpower insists on destroying your entire existence and that is the only way to stave off the onslaught, at least it is completely rational to want such weapons. Especially with freakish warhawks in the Israeli government who desire and actively seek Iran's demise who themselves are armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons.
The path to peace with Iran is the same with all nations: commerce. Money for oil is far better than blood for oil, I think we can all agree to that. Commerce establishes the interdependence of the nations. If one has a non-interventionist foreign policy, than commerce with all nations can occur without those entangling alliances causing massive uncooperation and isolationism.
Commerce makes me get along with you for my benefit, which benefits you. Mutual dependence allows each party to achieve greater flourishing. As individuals, true interdependence creates human flourishing and excellence. As nations, it creates prosperity as the division of labor is maximized over the globe, for the good of all nations.
Free trade and honest commerce is the path to world peace. But if you want war, you attack your enemy's ability to trade openly. Trade must be fostered with all nations and we must allow any nation, no matter how despicable the regime, to trade with others. Isolation conceives war.
Mother Theresa rightly said, "If you want peace, work for justice." This is especially true in our global village. If you want peace, work for honest and free trade. Then armies won't have to march across borders.
gomer
AMDG
No comments:
Post a Comment