President Obama has proposed taking
military action to punish Bashar Al-Assad for using chemical weapons
against his own people. Obama argues that permitting this use to pass
unpunished would make it easier for other nations or terrorist groups
to use chemical weapons against us and our allies.
I applaud Obama for his demonstration
of humanity and compassion. Clinton and G.W. Bush used to speak about
compassion, but they did so to justify inhumane acts, such as
persecuting welfare recipients or starting wars in distant countries.
Obama evidently believes in the rule of law. He believes that those
who break the law must be punished in order for justice to be done.
Obama's heart is in the right place.
But he is wrong about how to punish the Assad regime. Dropping bombs
on Syria will only harm the Syrian people, not the dictator who is
killing them. It will also continue the cycle of vengeance that laws
were invented to prevent.
The cycle of vengeance is familiar to
every student of history. If you attack me, or my friend, I will
attack you, harder if possible. Then you will have to attack me to
retain your self-respect. There is no end to this cycle.
The cycle of vengeance drives politics
in the Middle East. Some Americans urge action against Assad because
our enemies will not respect (or fear) us if we do nothing. People
who say this believe that the cycle of vengeance can be ended by one
more violent action, ours. They are obviously wrong. Our enemies take
actions against us every day. Far from being deterred by our
posturing, they are emboldened by it. Our acts of war convince people
that we are a violent, lawless nation. The people of the world are
more—not less—likely to oppose us because of violent actions we
have taken and those we may make in the future.
Obama finds himself president of the
strongest military power in the world. He also has a strong empathy
for the people suffering in Syria. He believes he is the only one in
the world who can aid the Syrians. We should applaud his motives, but
not his intentions.
Obama can take many actions to further
world peace without dropping bombs on anyone.
The United States should rejoin the
International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of
Justice (ICJ). The US helped to set up these courts to handle
international cases, but in recent years the US has become more
isolated in the world, refusing to participate in world justice
organizations because rulings have gone against us or our allies.
When Assad finishes his reign of terror in Syria, the ICC will try
him for crimes against humanity. Most likely he will be found guilty
and punished for his crimes. That trial and punishment will be an
example to other rulers that their crimes will not go unnoticed by
the rest of the world.
The United States should call on all
nations to stop providing aid and weapons to the Assad regime or to
the opposition forces. The US should use its other great power, its
wealth, to enforce this boycott. The US should call for all nations
and corporations to divest themselves of economic instruments that
support corporations engaged in warfare around the world.
Weapons do not magically come into
existence. Corporations produce them and profit from their sales. The
US should call on all corporations to stop providing such weapons to
countries that abuse them. Corporations that fail to cooperate should
be taxed to ensure that they do not profit from exporting misery.
Just as the US should convert to a
green economy, it should also convert to a peace economy. In a peace
economy, every economic decision that promotes peace is rewarded.
Every economic action that promotes war is punished, not by bombs,
but by economic disincentives.
The so-called war on terror has proven
that the vast strength of our military is useless against a tiny,
ragged band of committed soldiers. Our only safety comes from
convincing people that they have nothing to gain from violence and
everything to lose.
No comments:
Post a Comment