Millions of refugees are flooding into Europe. That’s more than Europe can handle even if all of the countries involved really did their part. But countries like Hungry, those that used to make up Yugoslavia and many others won’t. Nations around the world like the U.S. and Australia are considering bringing in many more refugees than we already have, and we should. Sure there are security concerns but we allocate billions a year for security in this country. Maybe it would be a good idea if some of that money was spent on this human disaster. There are no more bloated, wasteful departments in the US government than Homeland Security and the Pentagon.
Even as we debate how many refugees we should be taking in, the inevitable blame game for the situation that has caused this migration, is in full sway. There are whole segments of the argument that say we are at fault because of our foreign policy. So even though the governments of the Middle East must bear the brunt of the blame, those who accuse us are not all wrong.
The American thought process, as it applies to the world, but more specifically to the Third World, has always been of the opinion that an injection of Democracy will cure all ills. This is foolishness. Yet it still holds firm. Bush acted on it in Iraq, as did Obama in Libya, both with catastrophic results. Hussein and Qaddafi were horrific tyrants but it cannot be said of either country that the general population is better off as a result of their departure and the chaos we wrought in accomplishing it. The same is true of Syria. Were the people better off when they were being oppressed by Assad or now when there is no functional country for them to live in?
We have to get over the idea that democracy solves all problems. It is a very complicated governmental process that does work in certain sophisticated societies but those societies do not exist everywhere in the world. It seems that none of them exist in the feudal Middle East. We thought Egypt was a possibility and we were wrong. Iran could work with some tamping down of religion, but most of the Arab world functions much better when they have a dictator who keeps his foot firmly pressing on their necks.
Anyone who has ever studied government knows that a benevolent dictatorship is the most functional way to run a country. Of course, the key is finding a dictator who is benevolent. It’s the equivalent of a needle in a haystack. Iran had a good leader once but we didn’t like that he cuddled up to the Soviets as much as he did to us. So our CIA and the Brits MI6 forced him out. So much for how good we are for the Middle East.
So, yes, we are at least partially responsible for what’s going on with the refugee problem but no, it isn’t primarily our fault. The big guilt lies with the rest of the Middle East and the huge dysfunction brought to that region by colonization and the curse of oil.
Our Right wants Obama to invade – anything and everything that’s not nailed down, but that’s not the answer. The Middle Eastern countries, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, UAE, Bahrain, Yemen, Oman, Qatar and Lebanon must do their share to help the refugees and solve the military and political problems of Iraq and Syria. Only Jordan has done its share and more, in this area. Its king is the model for a benevolent dictator but, unfortunately, he stands alone. Saudi Arabia has the third highest military budget in the world and the region in general has more than five million troops in uniform. Where are these guys? We supplied the weapons that make up the Saudi arsenal. Now it’s time for them to get off their butts and use them. But they are primarily a Sunni country and ISIS s a Sunni force so they stand back and watch as ISIS commits all kinds of atrocities. Of course none of these horrible acts are strangers to the Saudis, who display all the humanity of a rabid crocodile.
Neither Saudi Arabia nor any of its Sunni allies, with the exception of Jordan, have taken in any of the refugees. Maybe it’s because many of them are Christian or Shiites. That just shows what a dysfunctional mess this whole region really is and why we are wasting our time trying to make it function like a region populated by human beings.
Paul Ryan, as one of his first statements as Speaker of the House attacked President Obama for not having a strategy for Syria. He’s not quite correct. Obama does have a strategy but it does not involve bombing the area back to the stone age so Ryan and the likes of Cruz and Rubio can be excused for not understanding it. What the Right does know is that we aren’t killing every Arab from Damascus to Beirut and it drives them crazy.
If Obama was a Bush or a Cheney he would create a strategy that was spearheaded by an attack on whoever was in our sights and we’d be killing lots of Arabs, but also lots of American kids for no reason.
George Bush, our dumbest President, as instructed by Dick Cheney, our most vicious VP, , tried to establish all out attack as a political strategy. It isn’t. It’s a military plan. Anyone who tells you that he has a strategy to conquer the Middle East is an idiot and a fantasy writer.
Right now the Middle East is in chaos. There are so many factors at play, both internal and external that there is no way to come up with anything like a comprehensive strategy based on reality. Sure, one can go the GOP route and just make up a strategy based on what one wants to happen. That’s what we did in Iraq. That worked great didn’t it? But the elements on the ground in the Middle East are guaranteed not to act or react in anything like the manner that such a strategy demands.
Before we even involve the outside players like the U.S., Russia, and the NATO nations let’s just look at the regional forces and their goals.
The two big bullies in the area are Shiite Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia. Both of them want to dominate Syria. In fact the best thing for Syria would be that neither of them, nor the current leader Assad ends up dominant. The best thing for Syria would be a negotiated peace between the US, Russia, NATO, Iran and the Saudi’s, supported by peace keeping boots on the ground from Saudi Arabia, Iran, the Kurds and Turkey. This would give the people of Syria a shot at some kind of open election. It would probably be won by Assad because he still controls the power base there, but at least it would set a precedent and stabilize that area so that the coalition of nations could drive the ISIS forces into Iraq where they could be militarily conquered as much as any terrorist force can be. Of course there’s still be the problem of Assad but maybe next time his enemies will be able to execute a palace coup so that only Assad and his family get assassinated.
Then and only then can anyone think about a strategy to rebuild Syria and Iraq. The big problem for us is that we have to stop thinking Democracy is the answer to everything. It may work great for us but there are many places in the world where only a strong central authority can make the country work. Until we learn this, and also how to keep our noses out of other people’s countries, we can guarantee chaos in the Middle East and eventually the rest of the Third World.