The Belligerent Arrogance of America’s Anti-Nuke Foreign Policy further Aggravates already Difficult International Tensions — Take North Korea and Iran, as Examples

12 April 2013

A psychological rule that applies all over the world

When you talk provocatively and stupidly, you eventually get it thrown back in your face with a few bombs attached.

Secretary of State John Kerry engaged in America’s customarily bullying language yesterday, when he said:

Appearing Friday at a joint news conference with South Korea's foreign minister, Kerry said the United States would not accept the North as a nuclear power, adding that the war-like rhetoric of the Kim Jong-Un regime is unacceptable.

"We are all united in the fact that North Korea will not be accepted as a nuclear power," Kerry said.

"The rhetoric that we're hearing from North Korea is simply unacceptable."

In essence, “Ya’ll ain’t going nowhere that we don’t permit.”

The customary response, in every place that I have lived, including abroad, is:

Say what, mother------?!

What should Secretary Kerry have said in the face of North Korea’s wild threats of war?

That such threats are unacceptable in civilized society. And America will defend its allies and itself, if North Korea follows through.

There was no need to go provocatively further.

A rule of geopolitical conduct — nations often act just as emotionally as individual people do

Which means that the language of sensible foreign policy needs to be restrain itself from button pushing.

Let’s illustrate the manifestations of this principle with a situation that is not muddied by Kim Jong-Un’s irritating, peacock-like posturing.

Telling a proud nation like Iran — with a history of Persian accomplishment that dwarfs our own comparatively short past — that it cannot do something, because “we” won’t allow it, is provocatively dumb.

Were I a non-American, I would take the United States’ constant bullying as a challenge to find a means to unseat its uninvited hegemony. Through foreign eyes, who the heck is America to imply that “my” people are not responsible or good enough to possess the weapons that the United States itself uses to push other people(s) around?

The moral? — When we Americans are blinded by excessive self-regard, we miss seeing other people’s legitimate resentments — and their increased willingness to act on them

In acting like a stone-headed bully, we guarantee that tough-minded adversaries will want to take us down.

Imperialistic feces-flinging may constitute sound policy for the Military Industrial Complex — which thrives on creating the international conditions that sustain perpetual war — but it is bad for the American people and almost everyone else on the planet.

There are times when quietly resigned nuclear containment is a better option, than constantly taunting our geopolitical adversaries with our alleged muscular superiority.

Making threats that one can back up is one thing. Empty yakking is another. We Americans engage in a lot of annoying sound, but virtually no constructively effective fury. We have left long trails of blood and unsuccessful occupations to prove it.

The Obama Administration’s foolishly provocative handling of Iran and North Korea looks like more of the same. We are again playing the part of the bully, who is soon to going to get his “hubris is bad” comeuppance.

All because we inexplicably forget the playground’s rules of effective interpersonal conduct:

If ya can’t actually make the other guy do it, keep your damn mouth shut.

Isn’t that what President Theodore Roosevelt implied, when he said:

Speak softly and carry a big stick — you will go far.

To which, I would add:

Don’t overestimate the capabilities of your stick.

PeteFree.com

The Belligerent Arrogance of America’s Anti-Nuke Foreign Policy further Aggravates already Difficult International Tensions — Take North Korea and Iran, as Examples