Big stick diplomacy

 

We hear a lot about negotiating with our enemies as the only way to solve problems that might otherwise lead to conflict or to resolve the situation we are currently dealing with in the Middle East.  But, those who advocate this course of action as the only truly viable option generally do not understand or fail to recognize the consequences of being unwilling to use force.

In a review of Jewish Encounters, written by Ruth Wisse, Rabbi Benjamin Blech poses the question, “If Jews are so smart, how come we are so stupid?”

 

“To reflect upon the story of modern-day Israel’s struggle for survival, it seems as if unparalleled naïveté is the national credo. Continually threatened by Arab countries clearly declaring their intent to destroy it, Israel pursues a policy that believes in arming its enemies in order to gain greater security. As Abba Eban famously put it, Israel is the only country in the world that wins wars and then sues for peace…To put it bluntly, where are our vaunted brains when it comes to politics and power?...In the latest in a series called “Jewish Encounters,” the eminent Harvard Professor of Yiddish Literature Ruth Wisse tackles this conundrum in her book aptly titled “Jews and Power”…It is a grave mistake to ignore the stated intentions of Israel’s enemies. Unilaterally giving up Gaza or any other territories is viewed as weakness, as well as a sign of the power of terrorism to achieve its ultimate ends. The only peace that can come from the abandonment of power is the peace of the dead, destroyed by their unwillingness to face reality.”

 

Throughout history, there have been many leaders who lived by the sword, destroying entire societies and killing great numbers of people in the process, always in the name of power and riches, or to advance their religious beliefs.  And, without exception, they have never been benevolent. 

History is replete with stories of conquest to expand or retain power.  Some of the better known examples, in no particular order, are: Attila the Hun; Alexander the Great (Greek; one of the most successful military commanders in history; undefeated in battle. By the time of his death, at age 33, he had conquered most of the known world); Adolph Hitler (German; killed six million Jews and Gypsies plus millions of Europeans and Russians); Josef Stalin (Russian; killed an estimated 20 million of his own citizens); Pol Pot (Cambodian; annihilated between one and two million of his own people); Kim Il-sung (North Korean; caused the deaths of millions of both North and South Koreans); and a number of Roman emperors, to name just some.  No doubt you can think of many more.

In their quest for power and treasure, or in furtherance of their religious beliefs, they were all responsible for the deaths of millions of people. And, they ruled with an iron fist, often killing for no other reason than to terrorize, or allowing their troops to kill and pillage as a form of recompense for their service.

 

So, if the lesson of history is that those who seek to expand their power by force are unrelenting and unforgiving, often putting their enemies to the sword, what are we to make of our current adversaries, the Islamofascists?  They have clearly articulated their intention to destroy Western civilization, killing themselves and innocent women and children without compunction in the process, torturing captives without mercy, all in the name of their religion.

Do we really expect such people to honorably “negotiate” to resolve their differences with the West? 

The idea that we, as in America, have brought this on ourselves because of our arrogance and policies toward their societies is naïve at best, stupid at worst.  There is absolutely no evidence that our Muslim enemies will deal with us (negotiate) honestly and fairly without our using a credible threat of force.  Such thinking is both foolish and dangerous.

Teddy Roosevelt is famously credited with saying, “Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.” It seems to me that this maxim also applies to negotiating with our Muslim adversaries.  Theirs is a culture that interprets unwillingness to use power and force as weakness. 

However, carrying a “big stick” also must imply a willingness to use it.  Without that, it amounts to nothing more than hollow rhetoric.  Being prepared to use the “big stick’ of our military power in dealing with our enemies must be a given, clearly understood by all, in order to be effective.

But, that’s just my opinion.