Last week I appeared on a national
television news show to discuss recent events in the Middle East.
During the show I merely suggested that there are two sides to the
dispute, and that the focus of American foreign policy should be the
best interests of America – not Palestine or Israel. I argued that
American interests are best served by not taking either side in this
ancient and deadly conflict, as Washington and Jefferson counseled
when they warned against entangling alliances. I argued against our
crazy policy of giving hundred of billions of dollars in
unconstitutional foreign aid and military weapons to both sides, which
only intensifies the conflict and never buys peace. My point was
simple: we should follow the Constitution and stay out of foreign
wars.
I was immediately attacked for
offering such heresy. We've reached the point where virtually everyone
in Congress, the administration, and the media blindly accepts that
America must become involved (financially and militarily) in every
conflict around the globe. To even suggest otherwise in today's
political climate is to be accused of "aiding terrorists."
It's particularly ironic that so many conservatives in America, who
normally adopt an "America first" position, cannot see the
obvious harm that results from our being dragged time and time again
into an intractable and endless Middle East war. The empty
justification is always that America is the global superpower, and
thus has no choice but to police the world.
The Founding Fathers saw it
otherwise. Jefferson summed up the noninterventionist foreign policy
position perfectly in his 1801 inaugural address: "Peace,
commerce, and honest friendship with all nations – entangling
alliances with none." How many times have we all heard these wise
words without taking them to heart? How many champion Jefferson and
the Constitution, but conveniently ignore both when it comes to
American foreign policy? Washington similarly urged that the US must
"Act for ourselves and not for others," by forming an
"American character wholly free of foreign attachments."
Since so many on Capitol Hill apparently now believe Washington was
wrong, they should at least have the intellectual honesty to admit it
next time his name is being celebrated.
In fact, when I mentioned Washington
the other guest on the show quickly repeated the tired cliche that
"We don't live in George Washington's times." Yet if we
accept this argument, what other principles from that era should we
discard? Should we give up the First amendment because times have
changed? How about the rest of the Bill of Rights? It's hypocritical
and childish to dismiss certain founding principles simply because a
convenient rationale is needed to justify foolishpolicies today. The
principles enshrined in the Constitution do not change. If anything,
today's more complex world cries out for the moral clarity provided by
a noninterventionist foreign policy.
It's
easy to dismiss the noninterventionist view as the quaint aspiration
of men who lived in a less complicated world, but it's not so easy to
demonstrate how our current policies serve any national interest at
all. Perhaps an honest examination of the history of American
interventionism in the 20th century, from Korea to Vietnam to Kosovo
to the Middle East, would reveal that the Founding Fathers foresaw
more than we think.