Temporizing

At the Center for Security Policy Peter Pry argues for a dramatic shift in U. S. foreign policy:

Washington must at least temporarily suspend its righteous fixation on “international law” and “international norms” to speak the only language that Russia and China understand—“might makes right.” The U.S. needs time to rebuild its nuclear, military, technological, and economic strength, and to find competent political-military leadership, so that, if necessary, we can win World War III.

Goodbye United Nations, welcome Metternich.

If you’re wondering who Metternich is, his name has become closely associated with “balance of power” geostrategy.

And if Dr. Pry’s advice sounds familiar, that might be because it’s closely aligned with what I’ve been promoting here for, well, decades. I suspect his advice will fall on deaf ears which will result either in U. S. foreign policy becoming a laughing stock or, worse, leading us into a nuclear war which we lose.

Consider this question:

How many millions will the U.S be willing to sacrifice for the sovereignty of nations that most Americans cannot find on a map?

I see it as another way of asking the question I have been posing: is it in the U. S. interest? It focuses unswervingly on cost-benefit analysis. I suspect that political leadership in Washington and New York would give different answers than people living in Omaha. They shouldn’t. A decapitating strike would undoubtedly target Washington and New York. I’d go for Los Angeles, too (media headquarters along with NY and DC).

Keep Will Rogers’s advice in mind. Diplomacy is the art of saying “nice doggie” while you’re looking around for a rock.