Diplomacy
March 7, 2003
6:52 a.m.
Monthly Persistence. Hmmm.... Anyway, let's talk about Iraq and North Korea. My good friend Stephen Leigh recently discussed the topic in his journal, and it's got me to thinking here and there. We all know how dangerous that can tend to get. Let me start by saying that I am no expert in foreign policy. Most people are not such experts. This fact, however, doesn't get us put in jail for life in this country when we speak out. Don't get me wrong. Speaking out will occasionally get us put in jail for a short while. As will, in fact, the occasional bout of not speaking out, or the process of sitting quietly in front of an abortion clinic, or that random fact that we happen to look like someone who might do something bad. However, in the big picture, we don't see too many people rotting away for 30 years in a dank jailhouse in the US. Let us not forget that. No collection of people can ever be perfect, and we as a country are far from it. However ... Yes, there's a however coming from this camp. Note: I'm picking on my friend Mr. Leigh here because his thoughts seem to be similar to others I know, and because he's got a journal entry handy to link to, and because I just enjoy debating him overall. I have no antagonistic thoughts toward Stephen, and respect both his work and his ethics completely. Stephen worries more about North Korea than Iraq. I agree with him. But, quite honestly, what does that have to do with anything? Stephen's entry insinuates that we are doing nothing about North Korea while piling all our might against a snot-nosed brat who can’t do a whole lot of damage. I think this is wrong on all accounts. There is no doubt that we are working hastily to both understand the situation in North Korean and curtail it from going ... ahem ... ballistic. Does anyone really believe we aren't? If so, what do you think you should see in this situation. Sensitive diplomacy is a covert action, folks. It's the CIA and spooks and ambassadors meeting in shadowed hallways and buried conference rooms. Kennedy, after all, did not speak to Kruschev via HBO live broadcast. In addition, Iraq's leader may well be a snot-nosed brat, but he's a snot-nosed brat with the capability to some real damage outside his walls, and a propensity for doing so inside his own house. Should we go to war to stop him? Should we use force in this case when we're not using force in North Korea? This is a personal call. But you know, as a parent, I think that the tactics you use on child number 1 might be different from the tactics you use on child number 2. Same thing in the world of friends: the approach I take to Mary might be different from the approach I take to James. There are a few reasons for this, not the least being that Mary and James are different people and will react differently to the same comment. Another reason for this is that I might know James better, or my relationship with Mary might already be strained and so I don't want to risk making an enemy for life. No. I think we have to look at each situation on its own and decide what we want to do about it given all its parameters. For example, wouldn't it be great to send Africa a lifetime supply of aids medicine? Of course it would. And we're generally working in that direction. But there are several factors that constrain our capability there--specifically including an incredibly weird set of governments (weird in the sense that I don't really understand them and in the sense that they can't seem to get anything done together ... which is a precursor to any successful region-wide program). And so we look at Iraq, and the 10-15 years process that's gone on. We look at our resources. We look at our world situation. We look at what happened on 9/11. We look at what we know about various countries involved. Do you believe that Sadaam Hussein supports terrorism? Perhaps you don't. That's fine. You'll not go to jail on my account. But there's little you can say to me that will convince me that he does not support terrorist activity in a fairly substantial fashion. And I remember watching television that second day after the World Trade Center bombing as a parade of people got in front of the television cameras, clutching pictures of their family members and talking about what floor they were on and who they were and what they were wearing. Like it or not, the US is something akin to the world's parent right now. And we're facing a decision that parents fear and dread. North Korea is acting up for the first time in awhile, and so we as the world's parent need to react in a quiet, stabilizing fashion. But in Iraq, the situation is different. After many years of effort it is tough love time, so to speak. So, we ask ourselves, do we discipline an unruly teenager? If so, do we send him to his room, or do we ground him for life, or send him to boarding school, or take the belt to him, or finally give up and call the cops. It's a high-stakes game, though, because the kids this teenager supports have already bloodied us once. Can we live with ourselves if we let it happen again? Do we trust ourselves to parent the world? This is how I look at it. And I think the answer is obvious.  Daily Persistence is © Ron Collins |
|
The stories are coming out now. Hundreds and hundreds of gut-wrenching stories. Rescue workers, and families, and friends, and the efforts that are going on in real-time while the rest of the nation and the world watches. The networks are letting people come on and talk about their lost relatives. They carry pictures, with names and dates and floors. They give every scrap of information that they know. These people are exhausted, I think at one point. It's almost cruel to watch them--almost cruel for the networks to allow them on. After each one finishes, I think I've had about as much as I can take. But then I can't turn away. After awhile I began to realize that this is part of everything. I'm watching this not because I am voyeuristically inclined but because this is a way I can be there for them. Me - 9/14/2001 |
BACK TO 
|