US involvement in Mid-East wars: How can it end? The US has been in - PDF document

US involvement in Mid-East wars: How can it end? The US has been in a state of perpetual war in the Middle East since 1991. Most of the presidential candidates in both major parties support continuing the perpetual war. Some would expand it to Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia and/or Yemen. Is there any escape for the US from perpetual Mid-East war? Rediscovering our own traditions, experience and collective wisdom can show us a way. A presentation by David Grappo, J.D. To the Academy for Lifelong Learning March 10, 2016 1: Introduction: How I got here 2. Credentials 3. Usefulness of independent observers 4. George Washington’s view on foreign wars/treaties/and entanglements 5. Some major players involved in Middle East politics 5a. ISIS 5b. Turkey and Saudi Arabia 5c. Syria, Iran, and Russia 5d. Israel 5e. The Kurds 5f. Syrian “Moderates” 6. Historical overlay in Middle East 6a. Historical overlay: Shia and Sunni Muslims 6b. Historical overlay: the Crusades 7. Relevance of Washington’s foreign policy advice today 8. Washington’s advice modernized 9. Applying the modern approach to the US/ISIS conflict 10. The US lacks any strategy for dealing with ISIS 11. What military action should the US consider now with respect to ISIS and other Middle East hot spots? 12. Responding to the “fight there now or here later” argument for US military intervention 12a. “Fight there now or here later” argument has a history of failed uses in modern practice. 12b. Viet Nam 12c. Iraq 12d. Afghanistan 13. Immediate withdrawal from preemptive wars has been the most effective action the US could take. 13a. Viet Nam 13b. Lebanon 13c. Somalia 13d. Comparative effectiveness of intervention strategy and total withdrawal strategy 14. Abraham Lincoln’s advice: make friend s not enemies. Four modern examples. 14a. Applying Lincoln’s advice 15. Summary

1: Introduction: How I got here Thank you Judy Ringle and thank you to the Academy of Lifelong Learning for inviting me to speak to you today. It is an honor for me to be here. It is also somewhat of a surprise to me that I am here. I need to tell you the story of how I got here today. That will help me explain to you the significance, or lack thereof, of what I am going to say to you today. Our topic today is United States involvement in Middle East wars. Is there a way out of these wars for the United States? Just over a year ago I wrote a n “As I See It” column for the Gazette-Times on this topic. As many of you know, the Gazette-Times allows local people to write short columns of up to 600 words on any topic of interest to them. The GT hesitated at first, but finally decided to publish the column I had written. The GT editors were a little dubi ous because I couldn’t identify for them any credentials I had to address this topic. I think I finally convinced them to publish my article when I pointed out that they had run many pro-war articles by nationally syndicated columnists, but nothing by anybody who opposed US involvement in Middle East wars. My article was definitely opposed to US involvement in those wars. In fact, I advocated immediate withdrawal of the US from those wars. So, possibly in the interest of presenting an opposing point of view, the GT published my article. Shortly after its publication I got a call from Judy Ringle who coordinates speakers for the Academy of Lifelong Learning. She asked me to expand on the column I wrote and give this talk today. I explained to her that I lack the traditional foreign policy credentials that speakers on this subject might be expected to have. She encouraged me anyway - and so here I am today. 2. Credentials I want to talk a little bit more about the whole concept of credentials. And how, even with my apparent lack of credentials, I can still contribute to the debate on our important topic of today. So what do we mean when we say that someone has credentials? Credentials can be academic in nature. A professor who spends his or her life studying a subject would be someone who we would say has credentials in that subject matter. In our discussion about Middle East wars, someone who has been in the diplomatic corps would be someone who we would say has credentials. A person may have a lot of military, business, or travel experience in an area like the Middle East. That would be someone who we would say has credentials to speak out about Middle East affairs. Someone who has simply been a media pundit for years would also be someone who we might say has credentials to speak out about most anything they wanted to speak out about. W ell, I don’t fit into any of tho se categories. I have no academic, or diplomatic, or military or business experience in the Middle East. I have never been there. Yet there is a special kind 1

of credential that has long been recognized as worth paying attention to that I may have to offer. 3. Usefulness of independent observers This special credential has an honored place in the history of English literature. In 1837 Hans Christian Anderson published his famous short story and fable entitled “The Emperor’s New Clothes.” In that story two con men approach an emperor and convince him that they can weave a fantastic set of new clothes for him, but only people who are smart and competent will be able to see the clothes. The new clothes will be invisible to anyone who is dumb or incompetent. The emperor falls for the con job and decides to parade about in his new clothes after letting everybody know what the weavers have told him. The weavers were frauds and con men, but surprisingly many people who saw the emperor were lavish in their praise of his new clothes. The emperor finally paraded past a young child who laughed and exclaimed that the emperor was not wearing any clothes at all. Then everyone realized how foolish they had been and all had a good laugh at the fact that the emperor was parading about without any clothes. There are two important lessons we can take away from this famous fable. The first lesson is that sometimes people who should know better can get persuaded to accept as true something they should easily recognize as false. The second important lesson is that in order to get an honest opinion about something, sometimes you have to go completely outside the normal range of experts. That is where I come in. I am not within the range of experts anybody would think to consult about Middle Eastern affairs. Think of me like the child in The Emperor’s New Clothes fable. I can be candid and honest about Middle East affairs because I don’t have any one who I fear and must please. And so I can share with you today a set of thoughts, observations, and questions that can help you resist the strong tendencies now pushing our country toward new and bigger wars in the Middle East. We shouldn’t want to go there. So let’s start talking about the reasons why we should stay out of Middle East wars. 4. George Washington’s view on for eign wars/treaties/and entanglements The column I wrote for the Gazette- Times begins by referencing George Washington’s famous farewell address. I think that is a great place to begin any discussion of the proper United States role in the Middle East. Most of us are familiar with the most famous parts of Washington’s farewell address. Washington urged the country to avoid foreign entanglements and treaties and to avoid taking sides in Europe’s constant wars. He pointed out that European politics were so complicated that the United States would find it impossible to find a proper way to get involved in European wars. Picking any ally to support would surely offend some other ally. Picking any enemy to oppose would surely offend some other preexisting or potential ally. Europe has too many factions, intrigues and political undercurrents that the United States has no interest in supporting. 2