In Chapter 8 of American Ways, I observed that "Americans view their relations with other countries as more or less extensions of their relations with each other, with typically compatible combinations of self-interests and ideals, so that American foreign policy often has more to do with domestic than with international politics." (p. 281).
We saw an example of this general trend in American history in the speech that President Donald Trump gave on Monday, August 21, 2017. The President rejected the policy option of American withdrawal after 16 years of our fighting in Afghanistan and pledged eventual victory there over the Taliban, ISIS, and other terrorist groups. He did not say how this could be achieved or when. He did not specify what constituted "victory," but he said that it would depend upon conditions, also not defined, in Afghanistan and not upon some artificial timetable.
Although the President acted as though his new policy was based on careful analysis of the realities of the Middle East and South Asia, Trump's re-invigorated war in Afghanistan has more to do with domestic than international politics. It is based primarily on the ideals and self-interests of his political base, upon which he expects to win re-election in 2020. What are the political appeals of an extended war and the hope of victory in Afghanistan?
At a very basic level, Trump's war in Afghanistan diverts national attention away from or makes up for domestic political disasters, such as the investigations into Russian meddling in the American elections of 2016, the failure to repeal and replace Obamacare, and the white supremacy mess of Charlottesville. It's an old political maneuver to shift public attention from divisive domestic to unifying foreign issues.
In particular, Trump is arousing the patriotism of national unity that focuses on military might and service values. Among other demographics, one target is the aging Boomers who painfully remember Vietnam. They seek a military victory in the future that will compensate for the frustrations of Southeast Asia some half-century ago. This generation today is prone to hold in contempt those who might be soft on terrorism like those in the past who were seen as being soft on communism. They believe deeply in teamwork and social cohesion. Trump gains politically when he convinces people that he is a strong leader who knows how to solve problems with the advice of generals.
Furthermore, there are young men and women from small towns and rural areas around the country who enlist primarily because the Armed Forces present the best paying jobs to be had. Their families and neighbors know this, too, and they enthusiastically support the military as the industry that supports their children.
There certainly are Americans who deeply believe in a strong military to defend liberty and the American way of life against foreign enemies. They greatly fear ISIS and foreign-generated acts of terrorism in the U.S. Nobody wants another 9/11. And along with high ideals often come the self-interests of military patriotism, including the pay and benefits of the military, the revenues of military contractors and suppliers, and the election of representatives in districts and states with military bases and instillations. Defense has been a strong sector of the American economy, and a strong economy provides strong politics.
Trump is probably correct in his expectations that some kind of military success in Afghanistan could be called "victory" and leveraged for political gain. On the other hand, he is tempting the same fate of other nations and leaders who have tried and failed to extend their foreign policy goals into this region of the world, including the British and Russians over the last two centuries.
(C) 2017 Stephen M. Millett (All rights reserved)
Tuesday, August 22, 2017
Saturday, August 5, 2017
The Importance of Process
In Chapter 6 of American Ways, I observed that "When Americans cannot agree on conflicting ideals and interests, they resort to agreeing on a fair and equitable process to resolve their conflicts peacefully." Since the earliest days of the colonies, Americans have asserted their individual ideals and interests. They often butt heads with other individuals doing the same. While Americans have enjoyed certain rights, they have never enjoyed the right to infringe the rights of other individuals. Had there been no agreed-upon procedures to settle numerous conflicts among individuals, Americans would have fought and killed each other off a long time ago.
Processes are extremely important to Americans. Most Americans have followed the axiom "live and let live." But to people with self-absorbed interests and absolute beliefs, the ends justify the means. We see this often in the business world of high-competition and high-expectations. Profits are what matter most to many business people and investors. But they have to stay within the boundaries of the law and social acceptability or they risk alienating authorities and customers. We also see people with uncompromising values who are willing to go to extremes regardless of who else gets hurt.
To most Americans since the 17th century, however, the means justify the ends. There are "right" and "wrong" ways to get things done, not just favorable or unfavorable results. If you live according to the rules, then you are entitled to your gains, and those gains become protected under the law with broad community approval. You are also respected by the community of other individuals.
What do the concepts of fair and equitable mean? "Fair" means that all parties in a dispute agree to a process by which to settle conflicts and then abide by the outcome. In the eyes of many Americans, "fair" may relate more to the process than to the results. If the process is run according to consensual rules, then you have to accept the results as fair even if they are not what you wanted. Then, you just move on. "Fair" also means that the process was run without trickery, corruption, or perversion of the rules. Many times Americans have tried to bend the process to get their desired results. Therefore, procedural knowledge and transparency are required. For example, judges, lawyers, and law enforcement agents must understand the American system of justice. And "equitable" means that all parties are treated the same with no biases based on political favor, power, wealth, or social standing. That's the concept, at least. Unfortunately, achieving the ideal is a continuous struggle in the practical world in which wealth and influence play such prominent roles in the day-to-day affairs of both business and government.
Furthermore, the concepts of fair and equitable in the operation of peaceful processes apply to the most powerful person in the country, the President of the United States. He or she cannot excuse any means to justify the ends. The Constitution lays out a process for national government with limited powers and internal checks and balances. Just as a judge in a court, the President has to know the proper institutional procedures and follow them with transparency. In addition, the sensitivities of the American people based on generations of social processes must be respected, even in the technological world of social media.
(C) 2017 Stephen M. Millett (All rights reserved)
Processes are extremely important to Americans. Most Americans have followed the axiom "live and let live." But to people with self-absorbed interests and absolute beliefs, the ends justify the means. We see this often in the business world of high-competition and high-expectations. Profits are what matter most to many business people and investors. But they have to stay within the boundaries of the law and social acceptability or they risk alienating authorities and customers. We also see people with uncompromising values who are willing to go to extremes regardless of who else gets hurt.
To most Americans since the 17th century, however, the means justify the ends. There are "right" and "wrong" ways to get things done, not just favorable or unfavorable results. If you live according to the rules, then you are entitled to your gains, and those gains become protected under the law with broad community approval. You are also respected by the community of other individuals.
What do the concepts of fair and equitable mean? "Fair" means that all parties in a dispute agree to a process by which to settle conflicts and then abide by the outcome. In the eyes of many Americans, "fair" may relate more to the process than to the results. If the process is run according to consensual rules, then you have to accept the results as fair even if they are not what you wanted. Then, you just move on. "Fair" also means that the process was run without trickery, corruption, or perversion of the rules. Many times Americans have tried to bend the process to get their desired results. Therefore, procedural knowledge and transparency are required. For example, judges, lawyers, and law enforcement agents must understand the American system of justice. And "equitable" means that all parties are treated the same with no biases based on political favor, power, wealth, or social standing. That's the concept, at least. Unfortunately, achieving the ideal is a continuous struggle in the practical world in which wealth and influence play such prominent roles in the day-to-day affairs of both business and government.
Furthermore, the concepts of fair and equitable in the operation of peaceful processes apply to the most powerful person in the country, the President of the United States. He or she cannot excuse any means to justify the ends. The Constitution lays out a process for national government with limited powers and internal checks and balances. Just as a judge in a court, the President has to know the proper institutional procedures and follow them with transparency. In addition, the sensitivities of the American people based on generations of social processes must be respected, even in the technological world of social media.
(C) 2017 Stephen M. Millett (All rights reserved)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)