It used to be said for great diplomacy that it can achieve those results peacefully which cannot be achieved by highly destructive wars. However the most powerful countries appear to be forgetting this and instead placing more trust in bombs and shells.
A review of the recent performance of US diplomacy efforts has just appeared in ‘Responsible Statecraft’ (8 October) under the tell-tale title ‘How Blinken turned the diplomatic corps into a wing of the military’. Written by Ted Snider, this review states, “At the end of full-term in office, the Blinken State Department does not have a single diplomatic victory to boast about. At the start of his term, Biden promised to “offer Tehran a credible path to diplomacy.” He promised he would “promptly reverse the failed Trump policies that have inflicted harm on the Cuban people and done nothing to achieve democracy and human rights.” He promised a different foreign policy from Trump’s “abject failure” in Venezuela. And he promised a new approach to North Korea that “is open to and will explore diplomacy. The Blinken State Department has delivered on none of these promises and has failed to attain a ceasefire in Gaza or in Ukraine. Instead it has availed itself of a one tool box of coercion, be it sanction or military force.”
While such an over-reliance or coercion does not even succeed in the short-run, its longer term impact in diminishing trust and goodwill is even more damaging. In fact rapid erosion of goodwill and trust has become a major liability for US foreign policy and diplomacy.
In the early days of the Vietnam War, this is what a Vietcong soldier said to his US soldier prisoner, “You were our heroes after the World War. We read American books and saw American films. And a common phrase in those days was ‘to be as rich and as wise as an American’. What happened?” (quoted by Stanley Karnow in his article in Washington Post, 24 October 1965).
It would help US diplomacy and foreign policy enormously if it still tries to seek an honest answer to this question, and then makes sincere amends on the basis of this honest answer.
Geographically, economically and militarily, there have been few if any precedents of the exceptionally favorable circumstances in which the USA found itself at the end of the Second World War, a position strengthened further by Britain ( and in fact West Europe) surrendering its pre-war predominant position in the world to the USA, consolidated yet further by the Bretton Woods agreement. On top of this was the great goodwill, not only entirely deserved but nevertheless a reality, of common people in most parts of world for the leaders and people of the USA and for things American—from Hollywood to fashion to a wide range of consumer goods.
The USA could have, should have built on these tremendous strengths by using soft power and consolidating a leadership position at world level based on fair play and peace which was willingly, happily accepted by most people and countries. This could have been based genuinely (largely) on the welfare of people, for example by preventing many avoidable wars and humanitarian crises on the basis of dialogue ad diplomacy.
Unfortunately this was not to be and instead the USA resorted increasingly to wars and coercion to achieve its narrowly conceived objectives, wars like Korea and Vietnam in which millions died and which clearly were avoidable wars. Despite this, the goodwill for the USA was so strong that it survived on its base strength for close to about two decades or so. The strong message of peace which President John F. Kennedy further gave strengthened the space for ‘USA is for Peace’ platform and if he had completed his term and preferably a second one, peace and goodwill would have progressed a lot under him. However his most tragic assassination (with over 99% probability of inside forces of violence and war being behind this), effectively killed the dream of the USA emerging as a force of world peace, and attaining a genuine goodwill based leadership of peace on this basis.
As a 7-year old child growing up in a quiet place in India, I still vividly and sadly remember the JFK assassination in 1963. It did not seem like something happening in a distant country at all, it was like some great tragedy of our own country–such was the sadness that appeared to overwhelm us.
However the hope for world peace that JFK gave with courage, and for which he sacrificed his life, was never provided by the USA after his assassination. Instead there was increasing resort to forever wars, regime changes, coercion and arms race.
Of course this has been very harmful for world peace but in addition this has also been increasingly harmful for USA’s own interests as well as its ability to earn genuine goodwill and trust of other governments as well as world’s people has been eroding steadily. The ability of the USA to use diplomacy for achieving peaceful outcomes like ceasefires as well as for resolving conflicts on more permanent basis has also declined significantly. As elections approach and a new government will assume responsibility soon, it is time for the USA to try to make a new beginning based on diplomatic skills for achieving its leadership aims in peaceful ways, increasing goodwill and trust.
Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Planet in Peril, Earth without Borders and A Day in 2071.
