Why American courtship has been failing abroad
November 1, 2006 (Press Release) --
I have been carefully considering the recent failure of American foreign policy and believe that I have chanced upon a suitable analogy. We all hope and expect that foreign policy, the relationship between nations, should at least be executed with a certain level of decorum and maturity. Alas, in its dealings with Iraq, Iran, and North Korea, America has behaved as if it were a man spurned by a succession of lovers – one who is still thirsting for revenge and seeking to impose his will.
Take the case of Iran. After World War II, America fell in love with Iran because of her bounteous possessions – her oil that is. The American suitor wooed Iran but she was not interested. She somehow developed the opinion that the gentleman’s intentions were not entirely honourable, and that he was more interested in her goodies than her well-being.
Thus, she spurned his advances and like any good woman when faced with such a situation she decided to retain her independence.
Unfortunately, for Iran, her suitor was not for spurning. In a cleverly designed 1953 coup, he replaced her head of state with a guardian in who he had the utmost confidence – The Shah. From that time onwards, the American suitor used his control over Iran’s guardian to dictate what terms and what favours he could gain from her.
Finally, one day, Iran decided that the best way to get rid of her exploitative suitor was to get rid of her guardian, even if that meant having to deal with the Ayatollah Khomeini and his band of mullahs. It was an act of desperation, rather like a woman taking refuge in a convent or monastery, in order to escape an unhealthy and unsuitable marriage.
Thus, it came to pass that The Shah was overthrown and the American suitor unceremoniously dumped. However, that was not the end of Iran’s problems with her suitor. Now, if you are a sane man, if a woman tells you that she would rather waste away in a monastery than allow you to get your grubby hands on her, the best possible response is to leave well be alone and move on.
GET OVER IT.
Sadly, America has been unable to do that, and have further insisted on destroying the monastery and bringing the clerics to heal. Since 1979, it has imposed sanctions on Iran and has generally taken a hostile attitude towards that nation. Iran for its parts is determined not to return to an abusive relationship.
As such, there is a standoff – arrogant petulance on the one hand and impertinent resistance on the other. The real sad part of it is that had the American suitor behaved more reasonably, Iran might well have overthrown the mullahs and departed the monastery by now. As it happens, the mullahs have been able to manipulate the fear of the American suitor to maintain the status quo.
The relationship between America and Iraq is even more torturous and troubling. Iraq took very careful note of the troubled affair between Iran and its American suitor in the 50s and 60s and decided that she would keep to herself. Thus, it came to pass that the then leader Abdul Karim Kassim decided to nationalise Iraq’s oil.
Alas, and much to Kassim’s consternation, America was never going to be satisfied with one affair – any woman with oil was considered fair game and the American suitor was going to have his way. Eventually, the CIA engineered a coup that got rid of Kassim.
Yet things did not go entirely as planned as one Saddam Hussein came to power. It immediately became obvious to the Americans that Iraq was not going to take anything lying down. Still, America flirted and flattered, trying its best to get on close terms – all this despite the fact that Iraq had by now become a less than virtuous woman.
Then there was a breakthrough. With the coming to power of the mullahs in Iran and the outbreak of war between it and Iraq, America spotted an opportunity. It could gain favour with one suitor, Iraq, by helping it to break down the will and ultimately the independence of the other, Iran. Why not kill two birds with one stone thought the American suitor.
Thus, it came to pass that America supported Iraq in its war against Iran, in the hope that it could ultimately control the future of both. Unfortunately, the war ended in a stalemate – none of the participants in this bizarre love triangle got what they wanted. Iran and Iraq exhausted each other’s human and financial resources for no net gain. On the other hand, America’s attempt to in some way improve its relationship and ingratiate itself with the two protagonists was in no way advanced. Indeed, it made Iran even more wary of America, given its support for Iraq.
It took another two wars before America brought Iraq to heel and control its oil resources – or so it thought. The problem was that American was so bedazzled by its ultimate objective, Iraq’s oil that it forgot to take care of the country. Iraq’s worst fears had been confirmed and like any woman who comes across a man interested in only one thing, she resisted the American presence.
Thus, it was no surprise that after having signalled to the world that he secured his bride with the phrase “Missions Accomplished”, the relationship deteriorated before the honeymoon had begun. Iraq did everything in its power to rid itself of what was in her opinion nothing more than a shotgun marriage to a suitor of dubious intent.
The rest of the world looked on as the marriage became increasingly abusive. Many offered suggestions. Why don’t you leave her? Don’t you see that your presence is only hurting her?
“No”, scoffed the American suitor, “she is just a little spirited. This is nothing but foreplay. Once she gets a good dose of her new freedom she will be fine,” he said, then squealed from the impact of a well-aimed blow to his nether regions.
The rest of the world was aghast. They had never quite seen foreplay like this before. They reacted with even greater trepidation when the American suitor, doggedly clinging to his unruly bride, started referring to his marital conflict as the birth pangs of a new Middle East!
The world looked on and wondered what this bastard of a child was going to look like, assuming of course that the American suitor was able to even consummate the marriage.
While all this was going on, the suitor’s old flame, Iran, was celebrating with glee. She was cheering Iraq from the sidelines and offering words of both sympathy and encouragement. Understandably, this made the American suitor mad. He wanted to grab Iran and throttle her. Unfortunately, his hands were already full trying to subdue Iraq. She had exposed his limitations, his impotence even. He bravely uttered a few veiled threats as to what might happen if only he could rid himself of his current predicament.
Iran smiled, knowing that she was already making special preparations for this eventuality.
The consensus is that whatever the outcome, it will all end in tears.
North Korea is a slightly different proposition. In 1953, the Americans were fought to a standstill on the Korean peninsula. There were tremendous losses on both sides, and neither emerged victorious. Initially at least this was one relationships where America did occupy the moral high ground – the North had launched a war of aggression against the South and the US resisted that aggression under a UN Security Council mandate.
Ever since that time, a combination of strange and bizarre behaviour on the part of the North Koreans, and less than edifying tactics on the part of the US have resulted in a tense standoff.
Yet, like any lonely woman or man for that matter, all the North Koreans wanted was security – a guarantee that they would never be attacked by the American suitor. Sure, she was more than a little paranoid, but for a while, the American suitor did engage and a terse peace prevailed. Then the American suitor spoiled everything when he started talking about the axis of evil, invaded Afghanistan, and then Iraq. Like any overzealous alpha male, he was brandishing his wares and boasting about the power of his equipment and the untold damage it was capable of.
The North Koreans decided that this was time to think the unthinkable. Before long, she too was brandishing her equipment and warning of what damage she could do, much to the alarm of all who knew her. “Do you like me now?” she asked. “Do you still want to mess with me or have you lost your appetitive for the chase?”
Discretion prevailed; the American suitor backed, and even declared that he had no plans for invading with his weapons. How different things could have been if he had started to use his head instead of his equipment before now.
This reminds me of that well-known adage – what is good for the goose is also good for the gander.
What are we to make of all this. Nations are no different from people. They have their fears, their insecurities, their honour, and their pride – and their history. Above all, they much prefer their own version of freedom, flawed though it may be, and they want to control their own destiny as well as their own resources. What they don’t want is someone else dictating terms to them down the barrel of a gun.
There is another important point to be made here. History did not begin on 9/11 – others remember a history long before that. This has at least as much to do with their reaction to current American foreign policy as the events post that date. It is a lesson that America would do well not to forget.
Jonathan Ledwidge is the author of the book A Mannequin for President; a satirical review of the American Presidency and why real power actually resides outside of the White House.
Take the case of Iran. After World War II, America fell in love with Iran because of her bounteous possessions – her oil that is. The American suitor wooed Iran but she was not interested. She somehow developed the opinion that the gentleman’s intentions were not entirely honourable, and that he was more interested in her goodies than her well-being.
Thus, she spurned his advances and like any good woman when faced with such a situation she decided to retain her independence.
Unfortunately, for Iran, her suitor was not for spurning. In a cleverly designed 1953 coup, he replaced her head of state with a guardian in who he had the utmost confidence – The Shah. From that time onwards, the American suitor used his control over Iran’s guardian to dictate what terms and what favours he could gain from her.
Finally, one day, Iran decided that the best way to get rid of her exploitative suitor was to get rid of her guardian, even if that meant having to deal with the Ayatollah Khomeini and his band of mullahs. It was an act of desperation, rather like a woman taking refuge in a convent or monastery, in order to escape an unhealthy and unsuitable marriage.
Thus, it came to pass that The Shah was overthrown and the American suitor unceremoniously dumped. However, that was not the end of Iran’s problems with her suitor. Now, if you are a sane man, if a woman tells you that she would rather waste away in a monastery than allow you to get your grubby hands on her, the best possible response is to leave well be alone and move on.
GET OVER IT.
Sadly, America has been unable to do that, and have further insisted on destroying the monastery and bringing the clerics to heal. Since 1979, it has imposed sanctions on Iran and has generally taken a hostile attitude towards that nation. Iran for its parts is determined not to return to an abusive relationship.
As such, there is a standoff – arrogant petulance on the one hand and impertinent resistance on the other. The real sad part of it is that had the American suitor behaved more reasonably, Iran might well have overthrown the mullahs and departed the monastery by now. As it happens, the mullahs have been able to manipulate the fear of the American suitor to maintain the status quo.
The relationship between America and Iraq is even more torturous and troubling. Iraq took very careful note of the troubled affair between Iran and its American suitor in the 50s and 60s and decided that she would keep to herself. Thus, it came to pass that the then leader Abdul Karim Kassim decided to nationalise Iraq’s oil.
Alas, and much to Kassim’s consternation, America was never going to be satisfied with one affair – any woman with oil was considered fair game and the American suitor was going to have his way. Eventually, the CIA engineered a coup that got rid of Kassim.
Yet things did not go entirely as planned as one Saddam Hussein came to power. It immediately became obvious to the Americans that Iraq was not going to take anything lying down. Still, America flirted and flattered, trying its best to get on close terms – all this despite the fact that Iraq had by now become a less than virtuous woman.
Then there was a breakthrough. With the coming to power of the mullahs in Iran and the outbreak of war between it and Iraq, America spotted an opportunity. It could gain favour with one suitor, Iraq, by helping it to break down the will and ultimately the independence of the other, Iran. Why not kill two birds with one stone thought the American suitor.
Thus, it came to pass that America supported Iraq in its war against Iran, in the hope that it could ultimately control the future of both. Unfortunately, the war ended in a stalemate – none of the participants in this bizarre love triangle got what they wanted. Iran and Iraq exhausted each other’s human and financial resources for no net gain. On the other hand, America’s attempt to in some way improve its relationship and ingratiate itself with the two protagonists was in no way advanced. Indeed, it made Iran even more wary of America, given its support for Iraq.
It took another two wars before America brought Iraq to heel and control its oil resources – or so it thought. The problem was that American was so bedazzled by its ultimate objective, Iraq’s oil that it forgot to take care of the country. Iraq’s worst fears had been confirmed and like any woman who comes across a man interested in only one thing, she resisted the American presence.
Thus, it was no surprise that after having signalled to the world that he secured his bride with the phrase “Missions Accomplished”, the relationship deteriorated before the honeymoon had begun. Iraq did everything in its power to rid itself of what was in her opinion nothing more than a shotgun marriage to a suitor of dubious intent.
The rest of the world looked on as the marriage became increasingly abusive. Many offered suggestions. Why don’t you leave her? Don’t you see that your presence is only hurting her?
“No”, scoffed the American suitor, “she is just a little spirited. This is nothing but foreplay. Once she gets a good dose of her new freedom she will be fine,” he said, then squealed from the impact of a well-aimed blow to his nether regions.
The rest of the world was aghast. They had never quite seen foreplay like this before. They reacted with even greater trepidation when the American suitor, doggedly clinging to his unruly bride, started referring to his marital conflict as the birth pangs of a new Middle East!
The world looked on and wondered what this bastard of a child was going to look like, assuming of course that the American suitor was able to even consummate the marriage.
While all this was going on, the suitor’s old flame, Iran, was celebrating with glee. She was cheering Iraq from the sidelines and offering words of both sympathy and encouragement. Understandably, this made the American suitor mad. He wanted to grab Iran and throttle her. Unfortunately, his hands were already full trying to subdue Iraq. She had exposed his limitations, his impotence even. He bravely uttered a few veiled threats as to what might happen if only he could rid himself of his current predicament.
Iran smiled, knowing that she was already making special preparations for this eventuality.
The consensus is that whatever the outcome, it will all end in tears.
North Korea is a slightly different proposition. In 1953, the Americans were fought to a standstill on the Korean peninsula. There were tremendous losses on both sides, and neither emerged victorious. Initially at least this was one relationships where America did occupy the moral high ground – the North had launched a war of aggression against the South and the US resisted that aggression under a UN Security Council mandate.
Ever since that time, a combination of strange and bizarre behaviour on the part of the North Koreans, and less than edifying tactics on the part of the US have resulted in a tense standoff.
Yet, like any lonely woman or man for that matter, all the North Koreans wanted was security – a guarantee that they would never be attacked by the American suitor. Sure, she was more than a little paranoid, but for a while, the American suitor did engage and a terse peace prevailed. Then the American suitor spoiled everything when he started talking about the axis of evil, invaded Afghanistan, and then Iraq. Like any overzealous alpha male, he was brandishing his wares and boasting about the power of his equipment and the untold damage it was capable of.
The North Koreans decided that this was time to think the unthinkable. Before long, she too was brandishing her equipment and warning of what damage she could do, much to the alarm of all who knew her. “Do you like me now?” she asked. “Do you still want to mess with me or have you lost your appetitive for the chase?”
Discretion prevailed; the American suitor backed, and even declared that he had no plans for invading with his weapons. How different things could have been if he had started to use his head instead of his equipment before now.
This reminds me of that well-known adage – what is good for the goose is also good for the gander.
What are we to make of all this. Nations are no different from people. They have their fears, their insecurities, their honour, and their pride – and their history. Above all, they much prefer their own version of freedom, flawed though it may be, and they want to control their own destiny as well as their own resources. What they don’t want is someone else dictating terms to them down the barrel of a gun.
There is another important point to be made here. History did not begin on 9/11 – others remember a history long before that. This has at least as much to do with their reaction to current American foreign policy as the events post that date. It is a lesson that America would do well not to forget.
Jonathan Ledwidge is the author of the book A Mannequin for President; a satirical review of the American Presidency and why real power actually resides outside of the White House.
Email
Print
Download
SPAM
LEAVE A COMMENT
