tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-381917167978264683.post5791722376458399790..comments2023-10-30T06:31:05.501-07:00Comments on MilPub: Keeping the PeaceFDChiefhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10607785969510234092noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-381917167978264683.post-66340278863581901502014-02-24T10:57:01.719-08:002014-02-24T10:57:01.719-08:00"But then, it would be awkward to call a give...<i>"But then, it would be awkward to call a given operation a "propping up our desired thug operation".</i><br /><br />Which is why you never read about "Operation Wog-Bash" or "Operation United Fruit". <br /><br />It's always less painful for the proles to be told that their tax dollars are going to feed adorable dusky urchins than to bitchslap furriners with political goals objectionable to the Adminstration's top donors.FDChiefhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10607785969510234092noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-381917167978264683.post-58448386946103101792014-02-24T00:44:57.298-08:002014-02-24T00:44:57.298-08:00As I have aged, the whole issue of diddling in ano...As I have aged, the whole issue of diddling in another nation's sovereign affairs has given me more and more pause. I can understand "humanitarian" operations somewhat, and I can accept creating a mutually accepted "buffer zone" (Sinai). What really becomes difficult is "taking sides" in what may or may not be a popular uprising, which is all too often what "peacekeeping" means. But then, it would be awkward to call a given operation a "propping up our desired thug operation".Aviator47https://www.blogger.com/profile/05585964386930142907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-381917167978264683.post-77591057547847187182014-02-21T16:56:44.622-08:002014-02-21T16:56:44.622-08:00Well, I think you can make a distinction between w...Well, I think you can make a distinction between what the party in question <i>claims</i> to be doing versus a more descriptive term for what they're <i>actually</i> doing; as Sven notes, "peacekeeping" can mean "Leveraging the side I want to win/not to lose" or "Holding down the pot lid to prevent something I fear from boiling over".<br /><br />So, while I'm sure that the British Army would have wanted to describe their actions in Northern Ireland as "peacekeeping" but I'd argue that "rebellion suppression" would be a more accurate term for its conduct during the Troubles.<br /><br />Beirut in '83 seems to have initially been a genuine peacekeeping operation along the lines of the Sinai MFO; to oversee and guarantee a negotiated ceasefire in the Lebanese Civil War. But Washington was seen as an ally of both the invading Israelis and the Christian Phalange which made U.S. forces a target of anti-Israeli and anti-Phalangeist factions including Syria, the PLO, Hezbollah and the usual assortment of jihadists. The only ones who didn't seem to "get" this was the U.S. foreign policy mavens and the MNF commanders.<br /><br />I would argue that Kosovo was not intended to "keep peace". The UNSC Resolution 1199 that authorized the Western intervention was directed at Serbia/Yugoslavia and demanded a ceasefire and acceptance of a UN-mandate in Kosovo. Again, the U.S. government sopkescritters may have called this "peacekeeping" but there was no peace to keep; this was "peace-imposition through aerial firepower".<br /><br />And, again, ISAF may want to call what its doing a "peacekeeping" mission in Afghanistan but, as you point out, it is in fact suppressing a factional rebellion against the Kabul government.<br /><br /><i>Being as we inheritors of the primate legacy, we do not look for rational, non-fighting solutions anytime soon. Perhaps, as with the schoolyard bully, the fight should be allowed, and until someone appears who can trounce him, the most brutish wins they day.</i><br /><br />Well, I'd say that this would depend. Is standing by while "the bully" wins genuinely in the U.S. national interests? ARE there any national interest in the polity where this beatdown is occurring.<br /><br />Which, in turn, raises the question of "whose interests"? If the bully promises to force his subject populace to make cheap goods for the American markets so I can by cheaper crap from Buttfuckistan, is that in my and my country's interest? But what if in doing so my company decides to relocate to Buttfuckistan and I lose my job? Now is that in my interests?<br /><br />So not prehaps as simple a question as it first appears...FDChiefhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10607785969510234092noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-381917167978264683.post-45569195972169176842014-02-21T13:25:34.398-08:002014-02-21T13:25:34.398-08:00"Peacekeeping" is often an effort to del..."Peacekeeping" is often an effort to delay or prevent a decision by force, executed by those who expect that they would not like the outcome of such a decision by force.<br /><br />The 'humanitarian' and the 'power politics game' motivations often appear to play into such aversion in parallel.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.com