Musing on…Global Political Updating

More and more, there are stories coming out about how plans for strikes against Iran are being drawn up. This doesn’t imply short-term action, but does point to future intent if the political climate doesn’t change.

As can be surmised from other articles on this site, I think the pluses and minuses of actually implementing these plans is more likely than not to fall on the minus side of the ledger. Why? Because there is so much more involved than simply whether or not Iran can enrich uranium. Let’s face it…the U.S. and much of the western, non-Muslim world isn’t in the best of global political positions. There is still time to stem the tide of non-secular passions run amok, but it becomes increasingly difficult the more the west, especially the U.S., rattles sabres.

The reality is that the U.S. isn’t able to run another significant military campaign against a non-trivial foe. To even think we can is…well, I don’t like to name-call sitting administrations. Even surgical strikes are very dicey, as it effectively says that the U.S. is at war with the Muslim world. Not the Taliban. Not al-Qaida. Not Hussein. Muslims (remember, Iran is Persian, not Arab). The one common factor is Islam. Whatever the reality, the perception is a de facto crusade. That isn’t going to sit well, even with the Muslims who disapprove of the current hostilities done in the name of martyrdom (sidebar: isn’t martyrdom something that happens to you after the fact, and not something you can actually plan for?).

Think of it this way…consider the uproar a few cartoons made. Imagine what attacking yet another largely Muslim country will do.

What’s the solution? I still think the single most important thing to do is give foreign aid to those countries that aren’t antagonistic to us…without any quid pro quo. Yeah, it’s the ol’ "win hearts and minds" gambit. Thing is, it tends to work better, historically, than gunboat or big-stick diplomacy.

But what about Iran, specifically? It’s tricky. Pragmatically, it’s more likely than not that some second-world country that the west doesn’t like will develop nuclear weapons. It then takes a few years-to-decades for them to realize that the weapons can’t really be used. But let’s posit a worst-case scenario…Iran develops and builds six 20-100 kiloton nuclear devices. They have medium-range ballistic carriers for delivery throughout the Middle East, parts of Asia, and perhaps parts of Europe. Let’s also have them in an alliance with North Korea, and it’s missiles able to hit Eastern Asia, and perhaps some parts of the American west coast.

Now…assume the world situation is such that both countries feel that they can use a good portion of their nuclear stock to make pre-emptive strikes…going under the assumption that Russia, China, and the USA won’t use the nuclear option for retaliation (Russia because of dwindling warheads and war weariness, China because of a desire of neutrality due to proximity, and the USA because the rhetoric is there, but not the will).

One of two things will happen: World War III, or a reshuffling of the nuclear powers club. It’s probably a coin flip. There are so many raw passions out there, and enough autocrats, that "dealing with the problems" in an overwhelming-force sort of way might be attractive. On the other hand, a sudden flush of diplomacy could create more regional alliances than currently exist. Alliances made not out of friendship, but self-preservation. Perhaps in this brobdingnagian game of Risk we’d trash the United Nations in favor of a United Regions.

In fact, this is actually an intriguing idea, and can be explored without resorting to the nuclear option. Why not start rethinking how we address world issues? The one-country-one voice-unless-you-are-the-first-five-in-the-nuclear-club is so last millennium. It’s time we start thinking about solutions instead of bemoaning the problems. While country-by-country issues still need addressing, it seems like dealing with a lot of problems on a Regional level makes more sense. Countries, due to their individual needs, can then also be part of several different kinds of Regions. The bones of this are already in place. Countries can, and do, belong to various political bodies such as: NATO, OPEC, European Union, CARICOM, etc.

A new United Regions would be an umbrella organization for all of these now individually-defined groups. The important thing about these groups is that they address common concerns among members with common interests. With an umbrella organization, some of the overlaps and gaps could be more easily addressed. Now, I’m not saying that this is an original or mind-blowingly great idea…only that it seems with the globalization of…well, everything…it’s time we start rethinking our old political and diplomatic paradigms. If the current situation in the Muslim world in general, and the Iran/Iraq area in particular shows, the time has come for some new solutions…preferable before it’s too late.