When Machiavelli states that fortune favors the bold, he is, of course, encouraging the taking of a proactive role in the international political arena. This is wonderful, correct advice. The United States has followed this example in many presidential administrations, in regards to different presidents’ foreign policy. During the Cold War, many presidents followed the policy of “containment,” or, in others words, actively combating the spread of Communism: President Truman’s Korean War, President Kennedy’s and Johnson’s Vietnam War, and of course, the rogue non-presidential example of Texan Representative, Charlie Wilson’s War in Afghanistan. Other past examples include, the CIA’s multiple wars in Latin America, fighting Leftist rebel groups like Che’s failed revolution in Bolivia, the Iran-Contra Affair, Operation Archangel during the Russian Revolution in 1917, the Marshal Plan, etc.
Seeing that America did when the Cold War, I would say that pro-activity has indeed served us quite well. Realism would encourage taking a bold, leading role in international politics as well. Physical survival is equivalent to military survival and the expansion of global influence. Some would call this Jingoism, but I would prefer to call it an objective form of foreign policy. Rational, proactive defense: engage the enemy before they engage you. It’s safe, but requires the upmost accuracy in military intelligence. One must collect accurate data of foreign enemies’ military spending, logistical movement, military strategy, and their intelligence operations. A nation cannot afford to attack on false pretenses, although mistakes happen, one must prepare for them.
You cite many examples of pro-active behavior by the United States as supporting evidence for Machiavelli, but I must take issue with some of your examples.
ReplyDeleteVietnam was a horrible defeat for the United States, it caused widespread political unrest at home, cost us horribly in hundreds of thousands of US casualties, cost billions of dollars and for what? Like the French before us, we were defeated and Communism won the day in Vietnam. The Korean War was a deadlock that did little to defeat Communism, the Iran-Contra Affair was illegal, the Archangel Campaign was a failure.
There is certainly virtu in actively addressing threats -- the US didn't win the Cold War by being timid, but there is an equal danger in acting too proactively, to the point where you get involved in horrible quagmires that cost you dearly in blood and treasure - as the USSR learned in Afghanistan.