Millions of refugees are flooding into Europe. That’s more than Europe can handle even if all of the countries involved really do their part, which countries like Hungry and many others won’t. Nations around the world like the U.S. and Australia are considering bringing in many more refugees than we already have, and we should. Sure there are security concerns but we allocate billions a year for security in this country maybe it would be a good idea if some of that money was spent on this problem. There are no more bloated, wasteful departments in the US government that Homeland Security and the Pentagon.
Even as we debate how many refugees we should be taking in, the inevitable blame game for the situation that has caused this migration, is in full sway. There are whole segments of the argument that say we are at fault because of our foreign policy. So even though the governments of the Middle East must bear the brunt of the blame, those who accuse us are not all wrong.
The American thought process, as it applies to the world, but more specifically to the Third World, has always been of the opinion that an injection of Democracy will cure all ills. This is foolishness but it still it holds firm. Bush acted on it in Iraq, as did Obama in Libya, both with catastrophic results. Hussein and Qaddafi were horrific tyrants but it cannot be said of either country that the general population is better off as a result of their departure and the chaos we wrought to accomplish it. The same is true of Syria. Were the people better off when they were being oppressed by Assad or now when there is no functional country for them to live in?
We have to get over the idea that democracy solves all problems. It is a very complicated governmental process that does work in certain sophisticated societies but those societies do not exist all over the world. It seems that none of them exist in the feudal Middle East. We thought that Egypt was a possibility and we were wrong. Iran could work with some tamping down of religion, but most of the Arab world functions much better when they have a dictator who keeps his foot firmly pressing on their necks.
Anyone who has ever studied government knows that a benevolent dictatorship is the most functional way to run a country. Of course, the key is finding a dictator who is benevolent. It’s the equivalent of a needle in a haystack. Iran had a good leader once but we didn’t like that he cuddled up to the Soviets as much as he did to us, so our CIA and the Brits MI6 forced him out. So much for how good we are for the Middle East.
So, yes, we are at least partially responsible for what’s going on with the refugee problem but no, it isn’t primarily our fault. The big guilt lies with the rest of the Middle East and the huge dysfunction brought to that region by the curse of oil.
Our Right wants Obama to invade – anything and everything, but that’s not the answer. The Middle Eastern countries, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, UAE, Bahrain, Yemen, Oman, Qatar and Lebanon must do their share to help the refugees and solve the military and political problems of Iraq and Syria. Only Jordan has done its share and more, in this area. Saudi Arabia has the third highest military budget in the world and the region in general has more than five million troops in uniform. Where are these guys? We supplied the weapons that make up the Saudi arsenal. Now it’s time for them to get off their butts and use them.
Neither Saudi Arabia nor any of its Sunni allies, except Jordan, have taken in any of the refugees. Maybe it’s because many of them are Christian or Shiites. That just shows what a dysfunctional mess this whole region really is and why we are wasting our time trying to make it work.
Paul Ryan as one of his first statements as Speaker of the House attacked President Obama for not having a strategy for Syria. He’s correct. Obama has no strategy for any of the Middle East right now, mainly because none is possible, If Obama was a Bush or a Cheney he would create a strategy that was spearheaded by an attack on whoever was in our sights and we’d be killing more American kids for no reason
The Republicans think that attacking is a political strategy but it isn’t. It’s a military plan. Anyone who tells you that he has a strategy for the Middle East is an idiot and a fantasy writer.
Right now the Middle East is chaos. There are so many factors at play, both internal and external that there is no way to come up with anything like a comprehensive strategy based on reality. Sure one can go the GOP route and just make up a strategy based on what one wants to happen. That’s what we did in Iraq. That worked great! But the elements on the ground in the Middle East are guaranteed not to act or react in anything like the manner that such a strategy demands.
Before we even involve the outside players like the U.S., Russia, and the NATO nations let’s just look at the regional forces and their goals. The two big bullies in the area are Shiite Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia, both of whom, want to dominate Syria. In fact the best thing for Syria would be that neither of them, nor the current leader Assad ends up dominant. The best thing for Syria would be a negotiated peace between the US, Russia, NATO, Iran and the Saudi’s, supported by peace keeping boots on the ground from Saudi Arabia, Iran, the Kurds and Turkey. This would give the people of Syria a shot at some kind of open election. It would probably be won by Assad because he still controls the power base there but at least it would set a precedent and stabilize that area so that the coalition of nations could drive the ISIS forces into Iraq where they could be conquered as much as a terrorist force can be.
Then and only then can anyone think about a strategy to rebuild Syria and Iraq. The big problem for us is that we have to stop thinking Democracy is the answer to everything. It may work great for us but there are many places in he world where only a strong central authority can make the country work.