Which we're less than a week away from here in the United States, but which - as a political issue - has been a hot topic during this election. From Iraq to Vietnam to numerous Central and South American countries, the United States has a morally iffy and largely unsuccessful track record of meddling in other nations' politics for our own purposes. Today's digest explores the topic.
As always, happy Wednesday and happy reading.
This Day in History
1963 - South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem is assassinated by the South Vietnamese military. The United States assisted in planning the coup, seeing Diem's massive unpopularity as an impediment to achieving strategic aims in southeast Asia. Diem, a staunch Catholic, was repressively anti-Buddhist, one of the primary reasons for his downfall. Protests such as monk Thich Quang Duc's self-immolation (pictured), fueled the movement against Diem. After his death, the United States become even more drawn into the deadly and disastrous war in Vietnam.
What If?
If and when considering regime change, one of the most important question that needs to be asked is: what happens after this regime? Clearly, America has often failed to ask this question and consider it thoughtfully in the past, but no action should be undertaken without asking it, and having an acceptable answer.
So today I'll lead in with an excellent piece that considers what a reunified Korea might look like (from the Economist). If the current North Korean monarchy collapsed, how bloody or bloodless might a reunification be? Of course it is easy to imagine both happy and horrible outcomes without putting much thought into either, but absent a vision of what a nation may look like post-American intervention, there should be no American intervention. Also, any vision of a reunified Korea brought together by an Eric Clapton concert is worth a read.
Building My Brand
Even the best laid plans fall to the side when the craziness begins, but without a plan there's no hope at all of a successful outcome. Right now it seems as though America has no real planfor sustainably addressing the decades-old turmoil in the Middle East.
Well I have a plan (from the Strategy Bridge). It's a five-point plan, to be more precise, and I'd like to think it's fairly comprehensive. Of course I'm no expert, but it baffles and irritates me when our politicians talk in broad strokes about "defeating ISIS," whatever the really means. As far as I'm concerned it doesn't really mean anything. It's not a plan, it's not even a very good talking point, and it certainly doesn't constitute a vision for a post-ISIS world, therefore failing to meet the threshold I outlined above: what happens after ISIS?
Collapse From Within
We think of regime change as being forced upon a people by outside powers, but of course, many regime changes - violent and peaceful - happen internally. We are seeing this now in Syria as well as in other Arab nations that were caught in the tide of the Arab Spring. In other words, regime change is hardly synonymous with American intervention. Though we view ourselves and other close allies as immune to such forces, in fact such threats exist even in stable democracies, such as Israel (from the NYTimes). For me, this piece raised interesting and scary questions about the stability of my own country - particularly in the face of popular neo-fascism - as well as the overarching post-Cold War global structure.
The Replacements
Sometimes there is an acceptable answer to the question: what comes after the regime? For two years now, I've been pitching the Kurds as such an answer, at least in parts of Syria and Iraq. American inaction and moral ambivalence may mean it is now to late to pursue a Kurdish state, which is tragic since the strong foundations of such a state exist in different parts of Kurdish-controlled territory (from Slate). While many Americans remained opposed to these types of interventions, I still firmly believe that only by moving away from the outdated and failed notion of strongman-imposed stability can we truly bring change to other peoples and places. Alas, this type of action, the truly difficult and transformative type, is what we are adverse to doing. We much prefer to replace one autocrat with another in an endless cycle of stability so fake and feeble that it would collapse entirely without our support.
King of the Zoo-gle
Hello dear readers, this is a lion, not a dog. A majestic and ferocious lion, but nonetheless just a big cat. I don't want to send cat-of-the-week pictures. I'd much prefer dogs. Please send me your dog pics. And if you're ever in Washington, DC visit the zoo. It's free, awesome, and this lion lives there.
Will's Weekly Trivia
Please be sure to share Willful Intent's new opt-in form with friends, and submit any thoughts and dog pics via the feedback form!
IF you choose to answer the question, respond to staton.will@gmail.com with your answer. Please note that by competing you are giving me permission to publish your first name in the trivia leader board each week.
Last Week:
1. How many men died at the shootout at the OK Corral? ONE POINT
2. Which major Syrian city has been a focal point of humanitarian disaster during the civil war? ONE POINT
3. Who, by herself in 1994, created, lobbied for, passed, and signed (in place of her husband in the dead of the night) a crime bill? ZERO POINTS
Answers:
1. Three men were killed during the shootout at the OK Corral.
2. Aleppo is the center of the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Syria.
3. The omnipotent Hillary Clinton single-handedly passed the crime bill.
This Week:
1. Who as the leader of Communist North Vietnam during the Vietnam War? ONE POINT
2. Who is the current prime minister of Israel? ONE POINT
3. The Kurds became prominent two years ago for rescuing a stranded group of their countrymen from a mountain surrounded by ISIS forces. This was particularly noteworthy because most Kurds are Muslim, but the minority sect trapped on the mountain was which religion? ONE POINT
