March 28, 2003

THE WORLD ON THE BRINK AGAIN
VIEWPOINT By Dr. Saul B. Wilen

History is again repeating itself. The interests of nations and the mega-interests of individuals (good and evil) are again clashing. The philosopher George Santayana in 1905 definitively predicted, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

The world is again on the brink of fulfilling this prediction. Prevention continues to allude the geo-political, economic and survival realities faced by the nations and the people of the world. The prevention paradigm requires the applications of skills, tools, strategies and processes that constructively lead to problem resolution and supporting the common good. Included in this model are awareness, information obtained in real-time, effective communication, and resources management. These lead to analysis and appropriate action.

The dynamics of 21st century clashes are different from previous times in one significant way: technology has altered the speed with which decisions and economic transactions occur. This allows the interests and influence of individuals to increase rapidly and come visibly and directly into conflict with states or even groups of states. It is the speed derived from technology that is different, not the influence or rise to power of individuals. In fact, such situations of supra-state agendas leading to conflict have existed for centuries, manifest by many entities and individuals including: Alexander the Great, the Roman Empire, the Holy Roman Empire, the Crusades, the Ottomans, the Robber Barons, the Arabian American Oil Company, the drug cartels, organized crime, the corrupt executives of a number of multi-national corporations, al-Qaida, and will continue to exist well into the 21st Century.

The nations of the world came together on the heels of the victories of World War I. But they failed to stand together on their resolutions and watched Japan, Italy, and Germany violate these resolutions. Remember the League of Nations, the failed predecessor of today's United Nations? This prevention opportunity was lost resulting in tremendous costs to the world. Imagine if the member nations had held resolute, then the consequences leading up to, during and after World War II might have been quite different.

The Cold War was born out of the naive decision made by the United States in 1949 not to exert its power to prevent the Soviet Union from acquiring and developing atomic/nuclear weapons. The result was the establishment of two armed rival nuclear super powers. This lost prevention opportunity resulted in years of confrontation with the stakes being as significant as potential global nuclear disaster.

In the 1950s, France as a colonial power controlled Indochina. The United States under the guise of protecting the world from Communism was drawn into this Southeast Asian arena inheriting the French conflict with the insurgents. The United States became embroiled in a long, painful and unnecessary era and war. Anti-communism blinders limited America's ability to understand the realities of the situation and resulted in major confrontations and divisions at home and the ultimate defeat of the United States in the Vietnam War. The prevention component was lost at the decision point when the United States stupidly assumed the responsibilities for French mistakes.

The option to negotiate with North Vietnam was available on multiple occasions and at multiple junctures over time. The results of applying a prevention model might have resolved the situation with markedly different outcomes. Actually, the United States accomplished what for hundreds of years has seemed to be impossible: forcing Vietnam and China (historical enemies) to become allies.

The fall of the Soviet Union ushered in a new era hallmarked by the progressive development toward an interdependent global economy. What has been lacking in this interlinked world economy has been the maturing roots for cooperation and the consideration of the common good. Rapid technological advances have remarkably spurred this growth while outstripping man's ability to reconcile needs, with the demands for resources and the requirements of information and the economic systems. These technological advances have even supplied power to individuals - including those who want to destroy the globalization process. The United States as the last remaining super power has adopted a posture of unilateralism, a potentially dangerous course in a pluralistic world with growing interdependencies. This approach has progressively come into conflict with the multilateralism of European allies. Obvious self-serving and conflicting interests of the involved nations have surfaced.

The Gulf War in 1991 was fought to liberate Kuwait from invasion and occupation by Iraq. The decisions to allow the Republican Guard to retreat with their arms and 75 percent of their tanks were strategic errors. The long-term prevention potential was lost when the decision was made to stop short of Baghdad and leave the known weapons of mass destruction in place. Subsequent support for an internal uprising by Iraqis was not forthcoming from the United States and the Gulf War allies, and the efforts by the Kurds (fomented by the United States) were not supported by the air power promised and therefore doomed to failure.

Twelve years of indecision by the United Nations; 17 violated U.N. resolutions by Iraq; and unbridled self-interest by member states have set the stage for the fate of the United Nations today. This international organization, which should be the center of meaningful dialogue, is in-fact at a juncture where realities are being discarded in favor of self-interests. This threatens the years of cooperation of the western alliance and the institutions created that at least had a potential to perpetuate the common good.

On multiple occasions during the 20th century opportunities to foster prevention have been lost due to the underestimation of both adversaries and allies. The lack of willingness to prevent when prevention is possible, and the lack of willingness to act when indicated, only emboldens adversaries and enemies, supporting their beliefs and resolve. The lack of willingness to prevent stems from the self-interests focused on power, acquiring wealth and political influence. This has been proven time and time again throughout history.

The unwillingness to learn from history is a human flaw that defies understanding.