So, I hear this one a lot from leftists. "Genocide is like the red line of red lines, if you aren't against genocide, you really are morally bankrupt" and variations like that.
I know there's a lot of people who think my stance on this issue kinda sucks, especially on the left, but I stand by my ideas regardless. Here's why.
Yes, we've tried to, after the holocaust, make genocide something we're morally required to intervene on, but let's be honest, I don't really think this is practical. it's well meaning, but anything that requires sustained effort over time to enforce is going to be difficult, expensive, and time consuming.
While I am somewhat interventionist in the world stage, I am so in a more strategic way. I support intervention that advances my nation's interest. I don't think we should intervene when it serves no strategic interest for us to do so.
If we intervened in every genocide around the world, we would be in a perpetual state of getting involved in wars all around the world, and basically being a literal world police force. We kinda tried to dip our toe into this in the 1990s with the Clinton administration, in conflicts like Somalia, Rwanda, and Serbia, and honestly, it was highly unpopular at home, the rules of engagement were confused where we were putting ourselves in harm's way, but we couldn't retaliate without a clear threat, which led to a lot of conflicts where we were being attacked, and honestly, what are we solving. When you got these different groups over there, and they really wanna kill each other, what does us getting involved accomplish? it doesnt take away the hatred, and in a lot of cases the second we leave, the conflict will continue. It might even continue with us being there where we're being regularly targetted. After the "Black Hawk Down" incident in Somalia, we kinda lost the political appetite to put troops on the ground in these countries, although we did kind of contribute to efforts to stop genocide in a more indirect way.
However, it still was unpopular, and arguably, it's one of the reasons why bush was elected in 2000. Bush himself portrayed himself as anti UN cooperation, and not getting involved in BS that doesnt affect us, and kinda just thumbing our nose at the UN. Of course, when 9/11 happened, he went nuts and decided to nation build himself. And we went into Iraq and Afghanistan. And those wars were ultimately useless. 20 years later, we solved nothing, ISIS took over Iraq, the taliban retook Afghanistan, and what did we accomplish other than getting Bin Laden's corpse? Not much.
I mean, if anything, the same anti interventionist streak we get on the left due to the Bush administration did kind of sour me on wanting to get involved in "forever wars" where we expend resources trying to involve ourselves in other countries' affairs. Honestly, I support protecting our allies from threats, and that's about it. Like, I dont actually like getting involved in stuff more than we have to. I don't think it accomplishes much. It's expensive, it gets American service members killed and wounded, and what is it for? Does this advance our own interests at all? NO!
So....unpopular opinion, I like staying out of conflicts that dont involve us. Now, that's not to say we can't provide support from behind in some cases, like logistics, weapons, etc., kinda like we're doing with Ukraine, but direct involvement is a no no for me unless it's necessary and advances some US interest. We dont have the resources to be constantly getting involved EVERYWHERE any time a country acts up and does something morally questionable, or even evil. And it baffles me to see the left so obsessed with Gaza.
Honestly, I'm a bit jaded on foreign policy. From a world stage perspective, international politics is like the wild west. It really is this darwinistic state of nature. And while we in the west have high minded ideals like human rights, a lot of the rest of the world lives in the dark ages. Even relatively advanced countries like Russia and China do things that could be considered genocides. We don't want to get involved directly with them, as it would be world war III and potentially nuclear war. As such, a huge aspect of international politics is that often times, international law is selectively enforced, normally by big countries like the US or other security council members on smaller countries. Large countries are often exempt because there's no way to enforce this stuff. The #1 rule of foreign policy is that the one with the biggest stick is the one that makes and enforces the rules, and yes, it only does so selectively getting involved everywhere all at once would bankrupt us.
And honestly, for people who dont think I have a heart, yes, yes, the rest of the world does a lot of really messed up crap I dont approve of. I just dont believe we should get involved. Logistically, these kinds of mandates to get involved are doomed to fail, international law is selectively applied, and that's just how politics works. And honestly, I have to ask, is this really worth sticking our necks out on? No.
And it's kind of the same with Natanyahu and Israel. Israel is a nuclear power. It's allied with the united states. And in the larger international context, the middle east is a battleground between the US and Russia, with a lot of the enemies we have like Iran being aligned with Russia, and the US being aligned with israel, etc. Heck, the Palestinian side of the conflict is largely supported by Russia against the west. And while I certainly dont approve of Netanyahu's current actions over in Gaza, I see little strategic benefit of siding with Palestine. We would lose a key ally in the region, and gain nothing. Leftists end up going ride or die on this stuff, ironically, because maybe there is some legitimacy to the narrative of "Russian propaganda" in the west. Or Chinese if we talk tiktok. But yeah, these anti US powers are kinda trying to manipulate Americans into siding with Palestine against Israel, which is why the left is going so bugnuts.
As I've said since 2016, I dont have the views I do because of russia, and I hate neomccarthyism. And we can see on my actual foreign policy stances, I'm a red blooded American, 100% pro the US, pro west, anti Russia, anti China, and not really sympathetic to their allies either. And I could see condemning netanyahu as potentially throwing an ally of ours to the wolves, and potentially emboldening some of israel's enemies, who are aligned with russia, to attack Israel. Like, yall realize if we didnt back israel, arab nations and Iran might try another 6 day war type thing where they gang up on Israel, leading to a much bloodier hot conflict in the region than what's currently happening? For those wondering why Biden doesnt do more to address Netanyahu's actions, that's why. Biden is in a position where he cant reasonably condemn israel without causing a potentially larger international incident, and Bibi is abusing the situation to his own gain.
It's a crap sandwich, I'm not gonna deny that. But if you value international stability, and not getting involved in more wars, Biden is doing the best he can. Like I dont think the free palestine moral purists really understand how complex international relations can get here and how to do what they ask could potentially upset the entire region and throw them into a powder keg waiting to happen. We're kinda just keeping the peace...actually...
And yes yes, I know I've heard people say those are "right wing" or "neocon" talking points, but sometimes the right has some good points on international relations. Sometimes the far left in particular is extremely naive. Keep in mind, the right is sometimes about pragmatism and conservatism and conserving the current order of things. The left is, in the context of international relations, about multilateralism and using soft power and diplomacy over hard power. Which is where Im at. Im not actually a neocon. Im actually a bog standard liberal. But leftists? Yeah, those guys actually do seem to actually hate the west, and everything it stands for. Everything in their perspective is power relationships and west bad because they're dominant and being for the underdogs for their own sake. But they dont ask whether the underdogs are any better. Often times they're not. I can tell you, if the roles were reversed, and Palestine was as dominant as Israel is, they would've committed genocide long ago. Because the west is the only faction that actually cares about ethics. For all the moralizing about our opposition's positions, if they had power, they wouldnt screw around and they WOULD just genocide or conquer without a second thought. Because for them, power is all that matters. They have no sense of morality. Look at what Russia is doing in Ukraine. That's like, pure evil. And Palestine on october 7th...again, the barbarity there has a visceral quality for me not even all of bibi's actions actually match in my mind.
Like I said it once before, the left is criticizing the west from the west's own moral perspective, without actually understanding that if the shoe was on the other foot, we'd be dealing with authoritarians who wouldnt blink twice about committing war crimes and genocide and all of that.
So...that said, how do I view israel here? Well, it's really unfortunate that we have to end up in a situation where we gotta keep funding Israel, but I do think we have our reasons for it. And that if we didn't, the consequences would be more negative than what they would be otherwise. This might, ironically, be the best possible world right now, where we're engaging in actions that minimize harm as much as possible. I dont know for sure, Im not omniscient. Im just saying, this crap gets really complicated really fast and stuff that the moral purists want might not actually fly in the complex mess that is reality of international relations.
I dont particularly blame people being frustrated with the situation, but I feel like I have to back Biden, and on the emotional side of things over there....well...I think we're best off just ignoring the issue and focusing elsewhere. The left is going all in on moral outrage with this and only this in particular, and i dont think it's helpful long term looking at the big picture. There's a reason i dont care much about this stuff. Empathy is, for me, in limited supply, I cant care about everything all of the time without being in a constant state of moral outrage and exhaustion, and i pick my battles, and this just isn't my battle.
If people think I'm cold for that, or immoral, well, tough crap. I don't care. Like, people think they can morally shame me into a position, you can't. The over the top outrage actually makes me double down. I will admit, the situation is bad, bibi netanyahu is bad. But hamas is also bad. And russia is bad, and the world is bad. And yeah, the world sucks and at some point you just turn off the moral outrage and pick your battles, and this isn't my battle.
And that's my perspective. The world is complicated, international politics really is a matter of "rule of the strongest" and is a relatively amoral state of nature-esque clusterfudge, and I'd rather focus on my own back yard than worry about everyone else's problems all of the time. It's easier that way. And if you hate me for it, tough crap, get off your high horse.
No comments:
Post a Comment