The Donroe Doctrine

The United States of America is on course to reincarnate the worst of the powerful era of Athens, the devastation of choosing military intervention over diplomacy, and embracing a dangerous foreign policy based on might rather than reason.

We have gone from the shining light on the hill to the bully in the school yard.

People who support this change, or more likely don’t even realize it’s happened, will make arguments like, “getting rid of Maduro is a good thing.” That remains to be seen from the perspective of the Venezuelan people, but if one wants to measure the legitimacy of military interference by the evil nature of a country’s government, a host of candidates match or exceed Maduro.

By that measure we should invade North Korea, Russia, China, and Saudi Arabia. The list of countries engaging in systematic abuse of human rights is long. We will need many weapons.

And there is a bit of introspection we might want to do at home starting in Minneapolis.

But let’s leave that for another time.

It would seem we prefer to go after low hanging fruit rather than a genuine commitment to righting all the world’s wrongs. So, in that vein, we set our sights on Greenland. What many of you may not realize is we have a military base in Thule, Greenland. Pituffik Space Force Base. Currently there are only about 150 military personnel stationed there, but at one time there were several thousand troops there specifically monitoring Russian and Chinese military operations.

he 1951 Greenland Defense Agreement allowed the United States to operate the base under a NATO framework, as long as both Denmark and the United States remain NATO members. Under the agreement, the Danish national flag must be flown at the base to recognize that the base is on Danish territory, but the United States is allowed to fly its own flag alongside the Danish flag on the facilities it operates.

Let that marinate in your brain for a bit. Since 1951 the government of the United States has recognized both the strategic military value of Greenland to our defense and, more importantly that Greenland is Danish Territory. So we are either a country that keeps its promises or we are not. What’s it gonna be?

If we have an agreement allowing us to accomplish the purpose of defending the United States against Russian or Chinese missiles, why do we need to incorporate Greenland into the United States. Why the belligerence between two nations long allied by NATO?

An excellent question.

By this point, you might be wondering why the comparison to Athens and what does that have to do with Greenland and Venezuela.

Let me explain.

At the height of the Athenian empire, around 416 B.C., it was one of the richest and most powerful nation states in the world.

They were at war with Sparta and her allies during the Peloponnesian War. Athens controlled almost all the islands of the Aegean except Melos. Athens sent an army of 2000 men and demanded the people of Melos submit to Athens rule and pay a tribute of silver.

Melos, although historically allied with Sparta, was neutral in the war. Melians argued from a position of morality that Athens was wrong to assert control simply because it was more powerful.

The argument fell on deaf ears, the Athenians laid siege to the island, killed all the men and boys, and enslaved the women and girls. As a side note, this bears a remarkable resemblance to much of the God directed smiting and decimation in the Old Testament, right down to the enslavement of women and killing of all males. But I digress.

From this incident, arose a process known as the Melian Dialog.

The “Melian Dialogue,” found in Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War, presents a stark and philosophically significant exchange between representatives of Athens and the people of Melos during the Peloponnesian War. In this dialogue, the Athenians demand Melos’s surrender and argue for the dominance of power and self-interest over notions of justice and morality, asserting that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. The Melians plead for justice, neutrality, and hope for divine intervention or Spartan assistance. Ultimately, the dialogue exposes the harsh realities of international relations and the limits of idealism in the face of overwhelming force, culminating in the tragic fate of the Melians after their refusal to yield.

Now we find ourselves with a government embracing a foreign policy and, one might argue, a domestic one, “asserting that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

Since the end of World War II, the world has generally been free of one sovereign nation invading another sovereign nation. While there have been plenty of civil wars and revolutions, the world has not endured a large-scale invasion until recently with Russia’s unprovoked attack on the Ukraine. Of course, in the interest of full disclosure, we could also mention our invasion of Panama.

Invasion was recognized, in light of the devastation of World War II and the dawning of the nuclear age, as a dangerous policy fraught with risks far beyond any reasoning justifying an invasion. Particularly one based on “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

The most troubling thing is a significant number of Americans either agree with the idea of might makes right or are too fooled by this government’s propaganda to recognize the reality, and insanity, of the situation.

After decades of NATO being the most successful joint protection agreement in history, we face the perspective of NATO troops coming to the aid of a NATO member nation not to stop an action by a non-aligned nation but actions by the United States of America.

All because we have put in the office of the President the least qualified person in the world and watched him surround himself with sycophants and those who lack even a fundamental understanding of history, diplomacy, or foreign relations.

The history of the world is full of times when a most powerful nation existed and let their own arrogance and might destroy them. In a nuclear armed world, every nation, no matter how powerful, is vulnerable to the weakest enemy willing to resort to such weapons. Now is no the time for arrogance, now is the time for calm rationality of which the US, should it choose so, can lead the world.

As the keeper of the most adept military in the world, we face a choice. We can follow the course of history and be the architect of our own destruction or show to the world that this American experiment is different.

To paraphrase General Colin Powell, all America has ever asked for when aiding other countries facing invasion is land to bury our dead. Let us not forget that.

You need only to open your eyes to see the problem.