Politics: Counter-Productive Intelligence

Today's little rant is about intelligence...or what passes for it in the corridors of power these days. It has become painfully apparent, to me at least, that much of American (and British) foreign policy amounts to little more that ideological blundering.

In the film Full Metal Jacket there is a scene where a general is explaining the reason for the war in Vietnam. He tells a young marine that "Inside every gook there is an American trying to get out." This is closer to the truth behind American foreign policy than most people would believe. The mere fact that, in order to "help" a third-world country to embrace democracy, it becomes necessary to kill two million of its' people and drop more tons of TNT than all the world's armies did in WWII, should make one begin to question the thinking behind it all. Isn't it a little counter-productive to kill the people you set out to free?

In the Washington Post today I read an article about the President announcing that 85 million dollars is to be spent in promoting democracy in Iran and supporting pro-democracy groups that are already working there. This article goes on to say that the announcement itself is considered counter-productive by those pro-democracy groups in Iran because they will now be seen as agents for the USA.

What are they thinking in Washington and London? Just yesterday British foreign Secretary Jack Straw announced a similar intention to begin broadcasting pro-democracy radio, in Farsi. This is because, as he puts it, "The Iranian people deserve better than their current government". Does this kind of announcement really accomplish anything other than the increased repression of those people you hope to aid? I don't think so.

I am not saying that resources shouldn't be used to promote democracy in countries where it is sorely needed and genuinely called for. Tyrannies of any sort should be actively countered and the oppressed people should encouraged to rise against them. But I do question the thinking behind making these sorts of announcements to the world. Regimes that are openly threatened from without react very strongly to interference within.

I would like to say just one more thing on the matter. Just because there is internal discord in a country, and we don't happen to like the present regime, doesn't necessarily mean that any change would be in our favor. You just have to look at the situation in Iraq to see that. We toppled a regime we didn't like, set the oppressed people free (apart from our own on-going military occupation), and the only allies that we seem to have made are the ones we brought with us and who were summarily dismissed as lackeys by the now-free Iraqis.

I would like to think that our foreign policy should be more in keeping with Teddy Roosevelt's idea that we should "Walk softly and carry a big stick". Not barge our way in like Bozo the Clown honking our horns and ringing our bells and stamping our big clown feet all over the people that we are supposedly trying to help.