Staying Out of Other People’s Wars
“If these negotiations [with Iran] fail, there are two grim alternatives,” said Sen. Richard Durbin, “a nuclear Iran, or war, or perhaps both.”
Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham returned from the Munich security conference saying that even John Kerry agrees that President Obama’s Syrian policy has failed. They are urging another look at air strikes.
North Korea is warning that should the annual U.S.-South Korean military exercises go forward in March, it could mean war, possibly nuclear war.
Philippines President Benigno Aquino III this week compared his country’s situation to Czechoslovakia in 1938, and the disputed islets off his coast in the South China Sea to the Sudetenland. Like Hitler in Europe, Aquino is saying, China is on the march in Asia.
Aquino wants the world, i.e., us, to stand up to China.
At Davos, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe compared Japan’s clash with China over the Senkaku islands in the East China Sea to German-British tensions on the eve of World War I. Though they were major trading partners, like China and Japan, said Abe, Germany and Britain went to war.
China’s foreign ministry charged Abe with “saying these things for the purpose of escaping Japan’s history of aggression.”
China was enraged by Abe’s visit to the Yasukuni Shrine where Japanese war dead are commemorated, including Hideki Tojo and 13 other Class A war criminals.
Asia today is like “19th-century Europe, where military conflict is not ruled out,” said Henry Kissinger at Munich.
Cal Coolidge’s admonition not to panic – “If you see ten troubles coming down the road, you can be sure that nine will run into the ditch before they reach you” – is often wise counsel. Yet, any of these five situations could bring about a war, a war involving us.
For we are obligated by treaty to defend South Korea, Japan and the Philippines. And the Obama “pivot” to Asia is seen by Beijing as a U.S. strategic move to contain China’s rise to superpower status.
The possibility of America being dragged into a new war is growing.
For not only is Beijing bullying its coastal neighbors, the Middle East is descending into a maelstrom.
Libya is disintegrating. Egypt is moving toward a new military dictatorship. Sinai is a no man’s land. Syria is three years deep in a civil-sectarian war with 130,000 dead. Sunni and Hezbollah groups car-bomb one another in Lebanon. Iraq is being torn asunder by Sunni Islamists in Anbar, newly battling the Shia regime in Baghdad. Tribalism tears at Yemen. Afghanistan may see a return of the Taliban when we go.
Nuclear-armed Pakistan is trying to reconcile with its own Taliban. Al-Qaida has denounced the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria for atrocities and dividing the rebel cause in Syria.
Even the jihadi terrorists are fighting one another.
Behind these conflicts is a Moslem awakening, a Sunni-Shia struggle for supremacy, the rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia for primacy in the Gulf, and the ethnonational dreams of Pashtun, Baluch, Kurds and other tribes.
Still, it is hard to see any U.S. vital interest so imperiled in these conflicts to justify plunging into another war in that hate-filled and blood-soaked region. Sarah Palin’s suggestion, “Let Allah sort it out,” begins to sound like the sage counsel of George Kennan.
Twice since last summer, anti-interventionists have routed the War Party. First, with the popular uprising that swamped calls for strikes on Syria. Second, with this winter’s blockage of new sanctions on Iran that could have torpedoed negotiations.
Yet in both cases the anti-interventionists succeeded because Obama has never at heart been a war president. And because the country does not want any more wars.
A sign of the times was ex-Reagan speech writer and veteran Congressman Dana Rohrabacher telling C-SPAN the U.S. media give too much time to McCain and Graham, who do not speak for the Republican Party when they call for military action. They speak only for themselves.
Yet, despite the victories of the anti-interventionists, the United States remains a hostage to war. Dating back to the early years of the Cold War, in the 1950s, we signed treaties obligating us to fight for scores of nations on five continents. NATO alone now requires us to defend 25 European countries, from Iceland to Estonia.
How many of these war guarantees are vital to U.S. security?
How many of these treaties, which could require us to go to war with nuclear-armed powers like Russia and China over tiny islets and minuscule nations half a world away, are truly in America’s national interest?
The 2016 primaries are the setting for the Republican Party to debate and to adopt a new foreign policy for the 21st century, a policy that rejects the mindless interventionism of the McCains and steers us around, not into, the wars of the future that are surely coming.
It’s time for antiwar conservatism – staying out of other people’s quarrels and other nations’ wars – one of the oldest and proudest traditions of the republic, to regain its rightful place in the Grand Old Party.
COPYRIGHT 2014 CREATORS.COM
Read more by Patrick J. Buchanan
- Will Mobocracy Triumph in Ukraine? – February 3rd, 2014
- Is Kerry in Denial? – January 27th, 2014
- What Did Our Wars Win? – January 20th, 2014
- A Blank Check for War on Iran – January 13th, 2014
- Why Neo-Isolationism Is Soaring – December 19th, 2013
Johnny in Wi.
February 6th, 2014 at 10:21 pm
Amen Pat Buchanan! I am proud that my family were anti intervention conservatives going back to WW1 and after.
jtt
February 7th, 2014 at 6:12 am
Come 2016 elections it will be who has the 'balls' to wipe Iran off the map, and the continued rhetoric of "National Security" to justify more wars….Allah help us.
no jojo
February 7th, 2014 at 6:32 am
" both cases the anti-interventionists succeeded because Obama has never at heart been a war president" Come again Patty Cake–Have you forgotten Libya,Syria or what is going on in Ukraine or Drones?Big news has broke out-Check out Prison Planet today's on Ukraine
Philippe
February 7th, 2014 at 7:06 am
I'm glad Pat has taken to using the term "nonintervention" instead of "Isolationist, ism", etc. Euphemisms these days are everything. The later term brings immediate knee-jerk sadly effective pejoratives about Munich from all stripes of hawks and works too well with the low informationals.
outsider
February 7th, 2014 at 9:13 am
I object to your use of the derogatory term "Patty Cake" against a man of Buchanan's stature. No one has been more articulate and consistent in his condemnation of our endless neocon-led wars than Buchanan. True, Obama has made many mistakes and often failed to stand up to the War Party. But I think there are evil forces at work beyond Obama's control. He controls the office temporarily. The MISC (S for security) is here permanently.
Down with Imperalism
February 7th, 2014 at 9:25 am
Nuclear-armed Pakistan is trying to reconcile with its own Taliban. Al-Qaida has denounced the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria for atrocities and dividing the rebel cause in Syria.
Libya is disintegrating.
Please stop action like a fool. WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL THESE WARS? It is US/Israel and those who control the circulation of money.
These wars are waged to destablize the region, then attack and finally partition into smaller states to bring under control of the criminal west and make the neighborhood SAFE for the racist zionist jews.
THIS IS DIVIDE AND CONQUARE, Patrick, if you don't understand it then don't blame the victims.
That's why is very important for Muslim communities all over the world to BE UNITED AGAINST THE WAR CRIMINALS IN WASHINGTON, TEL AVIV, Britain, France AND THEIR PETTY SERVANTS IN SAUDI ARABIA and Arab world.
RickR30
February 7th, 2014 at 10:13 am
Not easy being the world's police force, now is it. Now every miserable nation on earth is remembering some ancient border conflicts and looking for the US for intervention and racing to get Congress' attention. And some of those idiots actually care. But just as with the brutal local police around the US, you're going to deeply regret calling for America's help. The US has do drop its childish cartoon ideology, and the world has to grow up and solve their own problems.
outsider
February 7th, 2014 at 10:41 am
Mr. Buchanan's last two paragraphs are perhaps too hopeful. Ron Paul tried in the last two election cycles to get the GOP to debate "the mindless interventionism of the McCains." Where did that lead to? Dr. Paul was totally marginalized. Regarding the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act, only Rand and Sen. Flake have had the guts to stand up to the neocons that still control the party. Anti-war conservatism seems to exist mainly on the internet. It's barely a blip on the radar screen in the GOP.
ANU News.net Staying Out of Other People’s Wars
February 7th, 2014 at 11:44 am
[…] The 2016 primaries are the setting for the Republican Party to debate and to adopt a new foreign policy for the 21st century, a policy that rejects the mindless interventionism of the McCains and steers us around, not into, the wars of the future that are surely coming. It’s time for antiwar conservatism – staying out of other people’s quarrels and other nations’ wars – one of the oldest and proudest traditions of the republic, to regain its rightful place in the Grand Old Party. http://original.antiwar.com/buchanan/2014/02/06/staying-out-of-other-peoples-wars/#.UvTjaKDhdh0.emai… […]
wars r u.s.
February 7th, 2014 at 1:35 pm
mccain and graham are right but their solution is typical and wrong. obomba's Syrian policy is a failure but air strikes aren't the answer. The answer is not backing the terrorists and letting a sovereign country deal with it's own internal problems.
Darion
February 7th, 2014 at 1:38 pm
These are other people’s war. This is the US/Israel and the criminal west‘s plan to take over the world, Divide and conquered. The vicious plan is to divide Muslim countries through manmade destabilization using CIA trained TERRISTS, al qaeda, to topple government using massacre and bombing. Thus, it is very important that World population especially Muslim to be united against the war criminals in Washington, Britain, Tel Aviv, France to defeat them for good.
outsider
February 7th, 2014 at 2:07 pm
"macain and graham are right but their solution is typical and wrong"??? Where did you get that? Please explain.
Eileen K.
February 7th, 2014 at 3:35 pm
I totally agree with you, outsider. I bet nojojo has never read Pat Buchanan's well-written book A REPUBLIC, NOT AN EMPIRE. That book explains Buchanan's reasons for opposing intervention in other nations' wars. If he had, he wouldn't be referring to him as Patty-Cake.