Reuben, Reuben, I’ve been thinking, what a Queer World this would be, IF…….!
November 22, 2006
http://www.tribulationperiod.com/
Psalm 12 gives a good description of the state of the world today, due in part to the unreal diplomatic practices that are being carried out by the United Nations in Unrealistic Surrealistic Misguided National Interest.
Psalm 12:1-8 – Help, Lord; for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men. [2] They speak vanity every one with his neighbour: with flattering lips and with a double heart do they speak. [3] The Lord shall cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaketh proud things: [4] Who have said, With our tongue will we prevail; our lips are our own: who is lord over us? [5] For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the Lord; I will set him in safety from
him that puffeth at him. [6] The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. [7] Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. [8] The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted.
The last name of the man, who wrote this article from the Jerusalem Post, reminded me of a song as I read his offering. The President of Iran has suggested several different homelands in recent months where he would like all Jews to be transported. His most desired choice would likely be Hell. So, by substituting the word “Jews” for “men” in the well-known song by Harry Birch, we could probably guess his second choice for their permanent abode.
“Reuben, Reuben, I’ve been thinking,
What a queer world this would be,
If the men (Jews) were all transported,
Far beyond the Northern Sea!”
I love the Jews – Were they transported far beyond the Northern Sea, they would still be God’s chosen people. I have great admiration and respect for them, but there are definite trends across this planet which show a growing number of its population wishes the Jews would simply “go away,” believing the Middle East problems would
be laid to rest.
I know this would not be the case, but I also know this sort of unrealistic “thinking” will continue to grow.
Barry Rubin is one of the true “thinking” writers in the Middle East I read after, and the extracts from his article, which follows, show his thoughtful insight into the realism of national interest in international politics and principles.
I have a good ministerial friend who, like me, classifies himself as a realist in national interest driven goals of European politics, which makes us about as popular as “The Outcasts of Poker Flats.” My years in the USAF Branch of the National Security Agency turned me into a nation interest realist.
Begin Jerusalem Post Article
The Region: The Hijacking of Political ‘Realism’
Barry Rubin, THE JERUSALEM POST
November 19, 2006
The time has come to speak of what “Realism” means in international affairs. Historically, realism has been the core of diplomatic practice. This concept says that countries rationally formulate their national interests and pursue them.
These interests are defined in material, not sentimental, terms – obtaining or holding security, territory and economic assets. As an explicit doctrine this arose in Europe.
America has always had some trouble accepting this approach. It often seeks to inject ideas and values into its foreign policy.
In general, Realism needs some small, reasonable adjustments. Let me mention three:
(1) Ideology does matter.
The USSR and Russia have parallel interests, but how they define and pursue them is related to the difference between seeking world hegemony for Communism and just trying to keep a country afloat. Both the Shah’s and Islamist Iran tried to become the leading power in the Persian Gulf, but the way they went about it is rather significantly not the same.
(2) The interests of the regime might not be that of the nation. Syria as a country would benefit from peace with Israel and good relations with the West. But these things would mean death for the current regime. Therefore, these are not its policies.
(3) Ideas can be an important part of a Realist policy. For example, the US knew that promoting democracy and prosperity in Europe was essential to avoiding Communist takeovers.
During the Cold War it was the liberal position – for example that of John Kennedy – that America should promote reform and democracy in, say, Latin America, to achieve victory over the pro-Soviet forces.
But if Islam was “hijacked” by radical Islamists, Realism is now being hijacked by those who are far from being realistic.
REALISM does not mean that all countries think alike even if they act structurally in similar ways. The key is to understand how a given regime defines the national interest. This requires real knowledge of various countries, not just conversations with leaders or reading their newspaper interviews with Western correspondents.
Here’s how Lewis Carroll put it in Alice in Wonderland, one of the best guides for understanding Western policy toward the Middle East: “Would you tell me,” asked Alice, “why you are painting those roses?” The playing card painter replied, “You see, Miss, this here ought to have been a red rose-tree, and we put a white one in by mistake; and if the Queen was to find it out, we should all have our heads cut off.”
A Realist is not someone who repaints Iran, Syria, Hizbullah and Hamas from white to red, but rather one whose starting point is to recognize their true color.
To be so deluded as to believe one can profitably “engage” these forces is not Realism, but Surrealism.
Neville Chamberlain appeased Hitler at Munich with the gift of Czechoslovakia not because he was a bad man but because he thought it would work. The same applies to those who
today are ready to sacrifice Iraq, Lebanon and Israel on the same principles.
Human beings are supposed to learn from experience and observation. Syria has sponsored terrorism, lied repeatedly to the West, plotted to seize control of Lebanon, sponsored terrorists in Iraq, and so on. Are these strategies not a true picture of its national interests as perceived and practiced by the rulers? For five years the US government tried to engage Syria and found out it was impossible.
Iran is seeking nuclear weapons, spreading hatred and incitement, sabotaging an Arab-Israeli diplomatic resolution, sponsoring terrorism, trying to take over Iraq, and so on. Do its leaders have any idea of what they think suits Iran? For three years the world has been trying to engage Iran on the nuclear issue and found it was impossible.
CONCLUSION: There is a genuine clash of interests between the Iran-led alliance and those of
the West which cannot be bridged by diplomacy because of its goals and methods.
The Washington Post understands this in a November 15 editorial which advocates a truly Realist policy:
(1) The UN Security Council should quickly establish an international tribunal to begin criminal proceedings against Syria’s government for murdering former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
(2) It should consider other actions against Syria, including sanctions, if Syria continues trying to block the tribunal’ s formation and
sponsoring political violence in Lebanon.
(3) “Security Council action against Iran for its refusal to suspend its nuclear program is long overdue; governments that are holding it up, beginning with Russia, must be forced to choose between supporting sanctions and breaking off strategic cooperation with the West.”
(4) “Until Iran and Syria are made to pay a price for their attempts to radicalize the Middle East, they will have no incentive to rein in clients such as Hizbullah.”
And if this doesn’t happen, others in the Middle East will copy, join, or surrender to the extremists. As a great document of Realist politics put it: “On every side the wicked roam when vileness is exalted.” (Psalm 12)
End Jerusalem Post Article
So, do I think that (1), (2), (3), and (4) will happen. Of course not! Not even one of the four things listed as Realistic Policies by the Washington Post is going to be put into effect. So, why do I even bother to list them
?
I have only read after one Personage who is a perfect Realist, and has a Perfect Interest in the welfare of all nations. He is, of course, the God-Man, Christ Jesus. He is coming soon to establish a perfect kingdom on a devastated earth.
Ezekiel 38:18-23 – And it shall come to pass at the same time when Gog shall come against the land of Israel, saith the Lord God, that my fury shall come up in my face. [19] For in my jealousy and in the fire of my wrath have I spoken, Surely in that day there shall be a great shaking in the land of Israel; [20] So that the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the heaven, and the beasts of the field, and all creeping things that creep upon the earth, and all the men that are upon the face of the earth, shall shake at my presence, and the mountains shall be thrown down, and the steep places shall fall, and every wall shall fall to the ground. [21] And I will call for a sword against him throughout all my mountains, saith the Lord God: every man’s sword shall be against his brother. [22] And I will plead against him with pestilence and with blood; and I will rain upon him, and upon his bands, and upon the many people that are with him, an overflowing rain, and great hailstones, fire, and brimstone. [23] Thus will I magnify myself, and sanctify myself; and I will be known in the eyes of many nations, and they shall know that I am the Lord.
Revelation 1:7 – Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him.
Even so, Amen.
Zechariah 14:9 – And the Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and his name one.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. You may use material originated by this site.
However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.