Like most of you, I have ten screwball ideas a day. However,
you have enough intelligence or impulse control to dismiss yours. I write mine
down and blog them to thousands of people on the internet. Here’s one more. It
is a solution to the ongoing Rohingya Genocide. Simultaneously, it is an
opportunity for the United States to create an industrial base that would
compete with China and maintain its economic prominence in the world. The
structure of this article will present first, the plan; second, the advantages;
and third, the obstacles to success.
The Plan.
Step One: Have the US Military set-up a safe zone for
refugees on the northern tip of the Rakhine (Arakan) State, just across the
border from Bangladesh, in Myanmar. I suggest the US Military, and not a UN
peacekeeping force, since the UN is an ineffectual body that avoids placing
security forces in danger. Witness the behavior of the UN during the Rwanda
Genocide, where they withdrew UN forces at the moment of crisis (over the
objections of the mission commander), instead of reinforcing them, resulting in
mass slaughter of the Tutsi. The US Military, in both its officer corps and its
ground forces, has a different ethos. I have spoken with ex-military citizens
who express that, although combat is a frightening experience, many in the
military want to do good in the world and use the skills they have learned. I
understand that this is not universal, but they would not back down from a
challenge given to them by Congress or the President. And yes, I understand
Congress and the President are a problem here. I will discuss them in the
obstacles section. Hold that thought. Rescue missions would be necessary to
evacuate remaining Rohingya in Myanmar to the safe zone.
Step Two: Immediate international aid in terms of food,
medicine, temporary housing, water, sanitation and other necessities of life
would be required to sustain the refugee population. There would need to be
enough US Military personnel and resources to deter Myanmar forces from re-taking
that area. Setting-up the zone with its back to Bangladesh would permit easy
access to a friendly route for funneling supplies, easy return of Rohingya
population creating pressure in Bangladesh, and strategically, one less hostile
border to the safe zone.
Step Three: Okay, here’s where the plan goes off the rails.
One of the main reasons why the United States will soon surrender its position
of global economic prominence to China is that China has been willing to
exploit third world nations in Asia and Africa at a greater rate, with greater
central coordination, than US corporations have been willing to exploit them.
In addition, global industrial corporations that began in the US have simply
abandoned their country when cheap labor and lower taxes beckoned from foreign
shores. These have resulted in loss of prosperous blue collar employment and
revenue in the US.
A possible solution could involve the Rohingya and other
world populations that are starving, oppressed or victims of genocide and war.
The average salary in Yangon, Myanmar (a comparatively expensive city in which
to live in the country) is $300 per month. If we establish factories in the
safety zone, paying workers $600 per month, they would be among the upper
middle class in the region, well-paid for their labor given the cost of living.
The US government could establish contracts with US corporations, selecting
those who have already moved operations overseas, who are willing to set-up
OSHA-regulated plants within the circle of safety. A more radical, but more
profitable and effective, notion is to have the US Government itself create
factories, administer them, and take the profits directly without using private
sector middlemen. After all, the corporations that have already abandoned the
US have moved elsewhere so that they can pay people less than the average wage
of their target nation and avoid OSHA regulations, pollution controls, Child
Labor Laws, and other humane restrictions that exist in the US. This safety
zone could be administered by a combination of military and government
planners, along with elected representatives from the Rohingya settled in this
area. The protectorate established, with well-paying jobs, safety from genocide
and imposition of the aforementioned humane industrial restrictions, could be a
desirable place to live. In addition, a system of factories administered by the
United States would pay-off any initial outlay of cost for military and aid to
the region, the produce an annual profit which could be directly applied to the
US debt.
The Advantages.
Advantage Number One: This safety zone could be a blueprint
for other areas in the world that are troubled by war, genocide, starvation and
poverty. Many of these areas are Muslim and create recruitment grounds for
violent Islamic terrorist organizations. Making some of these areas prosperous
and safe would serve, not just the population under duress, but also the
population of the United States in terms of reduction of Islamic terrorism and
debt reduction. The Muslim Rohingya Insurgency is a military force that will
only become more radical and anti-Western as it develops connections to
international terrorist networks willing to supply arms, propaganda, training,
bases, funds and other means of support. We could provide a mutually profitable
alternative.
Advantage Number Two: Expansion of US geopolitical influence
into a region largely dominated by China is a helpful bit of strategy. As
China’s economy expands, they will be employing more and more of the area’s population.
We could get to this area first, providing a better standard of living and
create a thorn in the side of our main competition. No doubt, any area
established by the US military and government would include an intelligence
component which could discover useful information to give the US and edge over
China. China already accounts for most of the $600 billion that the US loses
annually to intellectual property theft. Maybe we could get some of that back.
Advantage Number Three: Although every empire falls, there
is no reason why our empire needs to fall NOW. I realize that my audience is
largely to the left-of-center, and has objections to empire; but an economic
leader in the modern age is an economic empire, like it or not. A world-wide
union, like the European Union, is not on the horizon. We have not been the
most humane or fair nation on the planet. After all, that is not how one
becomes an empire. However, the replacement of the United States with a China, (who
has an even worse human rights record, uses slave labor from North Korea and its
own prisons, and is a dictatorship that is not answerable to its citizens’
consciences), would be worse for international politics. So, whether you like
our empire or not, its stature is better for the world than that of China. If
they are willing to enslave their own dissidents and those of an ally, how are
they going to treat the rest of the world?
Advantage Number Four: The United States lacks something
that China has: a cohesive economic plan, and an undivided government, to move
it forward. This safety zone idea could be the first building block in a
cooperative effort between the contentious branches of the US government to
protect our nation’s interests. It has a number of features: humanitarian concerns
(appealing to the left), debt reduction (appealing to the right), and beating
China (appealing to both). These features have the power to unite political
factions into a joint effort.
The Obstacles.
I hope that I have not conveyed the notion that I am an
idiot. I recognize, as you do upon reading this proposal, that there are
obstacles. Likely insurmountable obstacles. But the conversation about how to
end genocide and avert international suffering has to muddle through a number
of unlikely plans and confused minds before it hits on something that can
actually work. This idea has potential. But it faces a Congress that can’t
decide if it wants to fund its own budget. We also have a President whose
ability and character I will avoid here because the purpose is not to bash
Trump and Trumpism, and I may actually have some from the right-of-center
willing to discuss this plan. Republicans will oppose this plan because it
contains some socialistic ideas (this despite the fact that the US frequently
tolerates a little socialism for humane reasons [Medicare, Medicaid, US Postal
Service, the list is long]). Democrats won’t agree because the only thing they
unite on is their opposition to Republican proposals. Citizens to the left-of-center
don’t like to see themselves as part of an empire and wouldn’t act to preserve
one even if it were in their own interest. Citizens to the right-of-center
don’t like socialism and rarely support global humanitarian assistance unless
it has the stamp of some Christian organization.
The Conclusion.
So here we are with an idea, that has no supporters left or
right, in a nation that is politically divided in its citizenry and its
Congress, that cannot agree to support a humanitarian effort in its own best
interest. I’m not sure if this situation says more about my crackpot idea or
about the crisis in the United States today. But I think that, like the New
Deal, this proposal has something for each side of the politico-cultural
divide. If I knew how to ignite the necessary, hippy-dippy campfire of
cooperation we need to circle around, sing Kumbaya, warm ourselves and put
aside our differences, I would already have done it. I’m probably wrong; but
perhaps this plan could be that campfire’s spark.
