A Presidential Matter: Foreign Policy

A detailed narrative of what the US must do in establishing a new foreign policy.

Every year near the end of February the Senate holds a reading of President George Washington's 1796 Farewell Address to the People of the United States. This as a way in honoring our Founding Father. A masterful speech, so eloquently written and yet pretty much deemed irreverent by members of Congress today. It is as though by automation that Congress continues this tradition. Unfortunately, our most esteemed leaders of state fail for whatever reason to comprehend the actual reference to what Washington was trying to warn us about considering our foreign policy decisions of late.

One has to go back to when President Theodore Roosevelt was President whose own approach to foreign policy "speak softly but carry a big stick" was an effective measure in which Roosevelt earned a Nobel Peace Prize. Today, by all accounts our foreign policy has been marked by the exact opposite of Roosevelt's policy. In all probability we would do well to epitomize what President Roosevelt did. But, the United States continues to inflict policies that have only crippled our effectiveness in brokering new alliances, forge treaties that would actually benefit the US like the Hippocratic Oath" first do no harm" and foster goodwill between all nations. This has to include those nations whose doctrines are totally alien to that of the United States.

For the past few decades the US has assumed the most unpopular position as the Policeman of the world. Unfortunately though we can't even keep our own house in order we embark on a righteous indignatious path of imposing philosophies, and economic sanctions upon societies who by their own traditions, customs and political philosophy seem and could very well be antagonistic to that of the United States. Yet, we continue to impose and even force our intentions like the bully we actually are.

One of the most recent contentious course of action the US has taken has been the economic sanctions imposed against Russia. It is these sanctions that have all but crippled the economy of Russia. In doing so the United States has again forced our will upon a nation whose actions did not threaten or have undue financial implications that would be detrimental to the economy of America. Foreign policy decisions made have only increased the animosity of other nations toward the United States. And, in fact have proven disastrous for the majority of US citizens as a result.

One of the key influences in our foreign policy decisions and subsequent actions either economic, or militarily for the past 40 years is primarily a direct result of our existing energy policy. "Big Oil" profits have always had a way of influence not only on political campaigns but on policy decisions that have continued to come out of Washington. Say what you will about our energy policies but the fact remains that our interests in foreign policy and subsequent actions are a direct result of oil conglomerates influence, and money on our elected officials including Presidents.

Questions have to be asked and yet no one is asking considering the falling gas prices here in the United States. While great news of the majority of the population who buy gasoline there could be a wolf hiding in the sheep's clothing of these receding gas prices. With Saudi Arabia continued oil production where domestic gas prices are falling are for the most part deceptive when we take a closer look for the long term economic forecast. When gas prices fall so do corporate profits. As a result a general slow down of economic activity, including increased unemployment. What could very well be a concise orchestrated ploy to undermine the already weak U.S. dollar and jeopardize an already fragile U.S. economy. A ploy by countries who have aligned themselves in retaliation to our foreign policy decisions and actions.

Our foreign policy for years has been flawed right from the start. Are the majority of Americas better off because of governmental sanctions imposed on other countries? For the past 35 years too many of our foreign policy decisions that have evoked economic and financial sanctions have done nothing to improve either countries economy and stability. In fact, all we have done is weakened the ability of all to defend itself against internal strife and opened up the door to instability.

What we should be focusing on is a better understanding of other countries priorities mainly Russia, China, India, Saudi Arabia, Iran, India and Pakistan. As of late all we have done is impose economic sanctions that have only exasperated the already delicate balance of global economies. It is our energy policies that have always played a vital role in influence and as a result many of our military actions. To date our military has had no real tangible results that have made the world a safer place. When we look at the landscape around the globe there are so many hot beds of violent aggression where at any given moment could ignite and engulf the world in a firestorm. More volatile situations have arisen in the past few decades as a result of foreign policy decisions and actions perpetrated by the US. Too many American lives have been lost, trillions of dollars wasted, and too many Americans are still in harm's way.

The Nuclear Equation:

The United States has to realize that at this moment there are nine nations with a combined total of over 18,000 Nuclear Warheads. The Nuclear Equation has to play a vital role in any foreign policy decision that we make. Of those nine nations two with a combined total of 300 warheads are poised at each other and at any given notice could spark a global thermal nuclear war. With implications like this the United States future for financial and national security is in grave jeopardy. With over 650,000 troops stationed between Pakistan and India where tensions between these two countries have been jocking for water rights for years has to be a major concern when any foreign policy decision is made.

As of today there are at Least 8 Radical, Islamic Factions, Including Al-Qaeda and the Taliban that are dangerously close to obtaining Nuclear Warheads. In Pakistan, the Taliban for years have had a potentially catastrophic sway over much of the military. The tensions between India and Pakistan revolve around an area known as Kashmir and one river, the Indus river known as the river of life. For Pakistan this one river provides more than 90%of Pakistan's freshwater for their agriculture, provides over 50% of the countries employment opportunities and is 30% of their GDP. For Pakistan this river is literally their river of life. And, for years Pakistan has accused India of stealing and diverting much of this rivers water.

Our foreign policy concerns have to be redirected to avail more fresh water even though today's global economy is focused on Oil. It is fresh water though that all living things on this planet cannot survive without it. For centuries countries have waged wars over fresh water rights. And, when countries are deprived of such they do whatever is necessary to acquire the resources to sustain life and that is fresh water. The escalation of tensions between India and Pakistan began in 1960 when they brokered the Indus Waters Treaty which stipulated that the Indus River and two of it's tributaries would be controlled by Pakistan. India on the other hand could use the Indus river for power generation and irrigation. The real problem is that back in 1960 the population of Pakistan was 45 million. Today it is 178 million. India has seen it's population grow from 448 million to over 1.2 billion during the same time period.

Without the intervention of the United Nations and with the continued diversion of the Indus River for irrigation purposes by India both countries are faced with a logjam which will escalate to a full blown crisis. A crisis that will spread through-out Asia and then the rest of the world. Today, with the Taliban pretty much controlling the military in Pakistan and has a major influence in governmental policies is as contentious as it gets. The fact of the matter is that with the many factions of extremist groups that traditionally are of the Islamic faith each one seeking their own individuality but yet capable of coordinating reprisals against those whose ideologies are contrary or are perceived as a threat to their existence have created so many hot spots of antagonism. Are foreign policy decisions have only intensified those violent reprisals either by groups, organizations, or individuals. The recent attack in Paris is a prime example.

The world has reached a point of almost no return. If on one hand the many factions of Islamic extremists band together on what many fear they will do a holy war against the West will ensue. We would be wise not to continue a doctrine of combativeness where history is once again repeated with horrific results. Think what the Crusades did for Western civilization, what Napoleon, the Ottoman Empire did, what Lawrence of Arabia tried to do only to be thwarted by the British government. History is written in the blood of so many who through volition, and conviction of their ideals conceived by governments that the sword prevails.

What was underscored in the aftermath of the most recent attack in Paris is an emotional response to a vicious savage attack on the liberties of man. Yet, it is these perpetrators of calamity who leave an undeniable mark for all societies to bear witness that they will use barbaric assaults to force their ideologies on all those who poses a different view or have used subversive tactics to impose a doctrine of a different ideology. It has been done all through-out history and the United States is repeating it today with our foreign policy decisions and actions.