Remember Star Trek and its motto, “Noninterference is the Prime Directive?” All Starfleet personnel vowed to uphold the Prime Directives with their lives (though they often didn’t, or the show would have been pretty dull.) The idea behind the Prime Directive was that civilizations are the best ones to solve their own problems and that interference from outside cultures usually makes things worse, even when the efforts are done with the best of intentions.
This may be an idea worth trying in our own international affairs. We are now bombing ISIS and have military advisers on the ground. But let’s look at our history in the Middle East. How well did our interference go in Iraq and Afghanistan? Things are falling apart pretty quickly in Iraq and the state of democracy is shaky at best in Afghanistan. What about our interference in the internal affairs of Iran in 1953, when America and Great Britain helped overthrow a legitimately elected prime minister and installed the Shah of Iran (www.cnn.com/2013/08/19/politics/cia-iran-1953-coup/; accessed July 27, 2014?) The Iranians paid us back with the Iran Hostage Crisis, when university students held American embassy personnel hostage after the Iranian people overthrew the Shah and put the Ayatollah Khomeini in power.
Of course, we haven’t confined our interference to the Middle East. How did our Asian excursions go? Viet Nam didn’t go so well. We lost, though we don’t admit it. How about Korea? It began as a nation divided after World War II and it is still divided (www.gwu.edu/~erpapers/teachinger/glossary/korean-war.cfm; accessed July 20, 2014.)
And let’s take a look at Latin America. Though our interference there was covert, for the most part, the fallout is still being felt by the people in those nations. The US military and CIA provided weapons and training to the El Salvadoran military, which subsequently killed 60,000 people and tortured countless others (www.franksmyth.com/the-village-voice/secret-warriors-u-s-advisers-have-taken-up-arms-in-el-salvador/; http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/deathsquads_ElSal.html; both accessed July 20, 2014.) The CIA helped overthrow the president of Guatemala in 1954 and the Guatemalan army, after training by the US military in the 1960s, slaughtered 20,000 Guatemalans (www.knowmore.washingtonpost.com/2014/02/11/half-a-century-of-u-s-interventions-in-latin-america-in-one-map/; http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/nov/27/us-honduras-coup http://www.zompist.com/latam.html; both accessed July 31, 2014). In 2009, the democratically elected president of Honduras was overthrown by the Honduran Congress and a new president, Porfirio Lobo, was installed. Despite President Lobo’s atrocious human rights record, which include killing opposition figures, the Obama administration has increased foreign aid to Honduras (www.latimes.com/2013/feb/12/opinion/la-oe-frank-honduras-drug-war-20130212; accessed July 31, 2014.) Many of the recent influx of Central American children immigrating illegally into the United States are from nations where America has interfered. We may have contributed to some of the conditions from which they are fleeing.
Of course, sometimes America’s interference has been helpful, even vital, to international stability. The most shining example is World War II. Without American intervention, we all would be wearing swastikas now and I would not be free to write this column.
Okay, so maybe noninterference isn’t always the right policy. But we have interfered with other nations’ affairs far too often, and usually for selfish ends (for oil in Iraq, and to fight communism or socialism in Latin America and protect American businesses in Latin America.) And now we have the civil wars in Ukraine and Syria, and the flare-up (again!) of the conflict between Israel and Palestine.
Until about 50 years ago, Crimea was part of Russia. Then Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev gave it to Ukraine (www.voanews.com/content/khrushchevs-son-giving-crimea-back-to-russia-not-an-option/1865752.html.) If Michigan, for example, was given to Canada and 50 years later there was a chance to return to the United States, don’t you think many of the people would want to?
And then there is the Israel/Palestine situation. The Palestinian people were basically kicked off their land to form the state of Israel in 1948 after World War II and the Holocaust. The Germans killed one-third of the Jews living in the world during the war, but they didn’t have to give them any land. The Palestinians did. The United Nations, backed by the United States, divided Palestine into Jewish and Palestinian areas (https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/creation-israel; accessed July 30, 2014.) After the Holocaust and with rampant anti-Semitism, the Jews probably needed a sovereign state if they were to survive as a people, but so do the Palestinians. If the Native Americans/American Indians were given the states of Kentucky and most of Ohio, might the Ohioans and Kentuckians object to being crammed into Cincinnati to make room for the Native Americans? Kind of puts things in a different perspective, doesn’t it?
So with these complex situations complicated by old rivalries and disputed land ownership, what should we do? Arm the government in Ukraine and the rebels in Syria? Send in American troops? Try to broker a peace agreement (again!) between Israel and Palestine? The truth is, I don’t know the answers to these questions. But I do know that our interference has often brought untoward consequences and caused resentment against America around the world. America is a big player on the world stage, but we must realize that we aren’t the only player and that other nations’ interests are just as valid as our own. We must also realize that we don’t understand the history behind many of these problems and that many of these cultures have worldviews very different from ours. We should let the people directly involved solved their own conflicts. ISIS will only become stronger if we continue our military actions, as radical Muslims will use this as a recruiting tool and as another excuse to attack our country. America will become less safe if we continue our current path. Arab nations, not America, are the ones who are most imperiled by ISIS and they are the ones who should handle them.
America should focus on humanitarian assistance while nations try to resolve their own problems, and use diplomacy and economic sanctions in coordination with other nations when we must interfere. But when it comes to military force, we should follow the Prime Directive.
politicalperspectivesandsocietalspeculations.com 