Out of the Box

 “It's so much easier to suggest solutions when you don't know too much about the problem.”

  - Malcolm Forbes (unfortunately no relation)

“The future will be better tomorrow.”

  - Dan Quayle

We are frequently told these days that we must think out of the box to be creative or productive.  Maybe we should also be thinking outside the box on world affairs.  The following are a couple of examples to consider.

The Kurds

The Kurds should have their own homeland.  The Kurds currently have enclaves in three countries, Turkey, Iraq and Syria.  All three of those countries are hostile to the Kurds.  They have been persecuted by the governments of each of these countries. Sadam Hussein tried to exterminate them.  Turkey has waged an off and on again war against them for decades.  It is currently on again.  Syria has been equally as hostile. Nonetheless, the Kurds have been some of the most effective fighters against ISIS; so much so that they are the ones that the Canadian government has chosen to support with arms and military training.  Surely after so much persecution and war the Kurds deserve their own homeland.  

At the end of the First World War, self-determination was a big part of the peace process.  It was applied relentlessly throughout Europe to set boundaries for the countries and peoples to break up the large empires, particularly the Austro-Hungarian one.  But it was never applied anywhere else, particularly the Middle East.  So we now have these enclaves of minor ethnic groups like the Kurds who struggle to survive in countries that don’t recognize their uniqueness.  Maybe it’s time to support their efforts.

The Middle East

Since the end of the Ottoman Empire, the western countries have been insinuating themselves into the Middle East for position and resources.  Britain had to control Egypt in order to secure the Suez Canal.  France had to have a sphere of influence in Lebanon and Syria.  More recently, oil has been to big reason for controlling Middle Eastern countries.  And during the past 25 years, the west, led by the United States, have tried through various wars and military incursions to bring “western ideas” to the area, whether the Middles East wants them or not.  So now that we have messed up all of the other attempts and destroyed whatever stability was there, we are in yet another such fracas, this time against . . . who? Since all of our western efforts have produced nothing but chaos in the region, maybe it’s time to think out of the box.  

Why don’t all of the western countries, the US, Canada, Britain, France, and in particular Russia. just get out of the Middle East all together.  Would the various wars and civil wars continue?  Probably.  But the wars will be contained to the countries involved directly.  It will be up to them to solve the problems that we have bestowed upon them, but it will be done in their way.  Is it possible we might not like the results?  Possibly.  But there is a very good chance that when the people of the region get tired or broke by all the fighting, they just may come up with a way to assure some stability.  It might involve one country (Iran?) becoming the power broker in the region, but with a wish to maintain the peace.  It may lead to alliances, perhaps along religious lines.  It will give the terrorist factions less reason the attack western countries if for no other reason than they will have to defend themselves against other regional groups.  But what about the oil supply?  Those countries that have it will still have to sell it to maintain their own economies.  Are there risks?  Of course there are.  But our efforts to date have not been exactly risk free.  The US says that the fight against ISIS is going to be long, and in the end, to what purpose?  Get rid of one terrorist group and another will develop, probably more extreme than the last.  Left as is, this can become the war that never ends.  If it is going to end, it has to end by the efforts of those who live, work and die in the region, not by some outside imposed solution.

This will, of course, set me at odds with all of those who think we have to “solve” the Middle East and fight all of their wars for them.  But look where their efforts have led. 

I recognize that the first and second ideas are contradictory, but since I don’t think either will ever happen, the contradictions are irrelevant.

“Thus it can happen that military men, while skilfully planning their intricate operations and coordinating complicated manoeuvres, remain curiously blind in failing to perceive that it is the outcome of the war, not the outcome of the campaigns within it, that determines how well their plans serve the nation’s interests.  At the same time, senior statesmen may hesitate to insist that these beautifully planned campaigns be linked to some clear ideas for ending the war….”

 

From “Every War Must End” by Fred Ikle