League Of Hot! Democrazies

Getting democracies to hook up, party and promote free choice, free trade and fun and what Uncle Tony calls the "Universal Values of the Human Spirit" seems only natural.

Desirable even. Hotties always hang in leagues.

Do leagues succeed?

Like Arab League? Their recent mutual hang in Basharopolis was like a hypocrit convention. Totally unproductive - even worse it granted a fait accompli to Iran to continue her murderous meddling in Arab affairs by vacationing in an Arab capitol that is openly ripping the living guts out of a sister Arab capitol.

Super subtle signals like sending low level cats to signal the uncoolness of Iranian influ in Arab affairs signaled the wrong signal.


Drawing back a nub in the Basra outright annexation deal thanks to Great Satan and the new Iraqi Army guys, having a league of their own taken to the woodshed so bad they screamed for a cease fire right from the heart of their very own former no go zone of Sadr Caliphate City, Iran recovered to drive to her hegemony by sacking Lebanon.

Thanks to another ineffective conference in Cairo last WE Arab League can openly brag that of all the words and verbs that can be applied to the League - success ain't on the list.

Would a hot! grrls only club for democracies do any better?

In the essential "America Unbound" semi avuncular Ivo Daalder kinda sorta whispers hot flash promises of unbinding all democracies - essentially overwhelmingly marginalizing and regime changing any unfree. illicit, illegit supreme leaders, presidents for life, warlords, resistance leaders in global range of darling dangerous democrazy dames.

This league could have tons of influ in DC - way more than unfree regimes and the UN would be stymied as a no game collection of thug hugging Tyrannies R Us gangsta clan gang that spends way too much time griping about Little Satan or dissing Great Satan for faults - real and imagined.

"When the UN finally does anything of use, it's propelled in large part by US dollars, with the US contributing more than any other country. Those other giants, China and Russia, are not filling the coffers of the UN's moral authority. "

The job description sounds like what could be an upgraded worldwide NATO esque deal (in place of NATO maybe?)

Super fly smart guy Robert Kagan (Oh! He got game!) makes a case for a rocking concert

"So would a concert of democracies supplant the UN? Of course not, any more than the Group of Eight leading industrialised nations or any number of other international organisations supplant it. But the world’s democracies could make common cause to act in humanitarian crises when the UN Security Council cannot reach unanimity.

If people find that prospect unsettling, then they should seek the disbandment if Nato and the European Union and other regional organisations which not only can but, in the case of Kosovo, have taken collective action in crises when the Security Council was deadlocked.

The difference is that the league of democracies would not be limited to
Europeans and Americans but would include the world’s other great democracies,
such as India, Brazil, Japan and Australia, and would have even greater
legitimacy."

Unfree regimes that fiddle about with WMD, threaten to wipe democratic members of the UN off the map would maybe pay billions for UN Sec Council vetos to develop a counter org.

Maybe? Looks like they are already. Russia and China routinely stall, trade and protect Iran, Syria and NoKo now. Would a league of democrazies make it official?

Critics cry out that

"Indeed Russia and China sometimes act as the de facto heads of a league of autocracies – protecting bad governments such as Iran and Zimbabwe at the UN. So it would be a good idea for the world’s democrats to promote their values in a more organised and determined fashion.

The trouble with this idea is that it risks creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.
America’s relationships with China and Russia are complicated and ambiguous – with elements of both competition and co-operation. But the formation of a league of democracies would harden antagonisms and might even be seen as the launching of a new cold war."

So what?

"Will the mere fact of democracies working together produce a new cold war? That is unduly alarmist. But ideological competition is already under way. Sergei Lavrov, Russia’s foreign minister, notes that: “For the first time in many years, a real competitive environment has emerged on the market of ideas” between different “value systems and development models”. The good news, he believes, is that “the west is losing its monopoly on the globalisation process”.

True or not, democracies should not be embarrassed about holding up their side of this competition. Neither Beijing nor Moscow would expect them to do anything else."

Events like Darfur, Zimbabwe, Burma and Sudan actually make the best case for a league of democracies that could act out humanitarianly in event of disasters and a clever backdoor method to slip in the R2P clause.

"It is only a matter of time before reports emerge again from somewhere of massacres, mass starvation, rape, and ethnic cleansing. And then the question will arise again in the Security Council, in political capitals, and in the media: What do we do?"

If the league is ready to adopt, birth and raise new baby democracies - then intervene, kill the regime, tend to the stricken and handle it.

If NATO, the UN and the EU cannot make commitments to take an 8 hour panzer ride to Serbia to put Milosevic out of biz or man up and defend tiny baby democracies in dark scary parts of the world in danger of having their tiny baby heads choked plumb off then would Japan, Australia, France, Great Britain, Great Satan, SoKo and Taiwan have the guts to take the challenge?

The R2P clause and the Atrocity Prevention philosophy should be bound up in the Democratic Imperatives.

"No one ever knows when the struggle will end. When they begin to crumble authoritarian regimes can collapse overnight. The fight needs uncompromising courage; but when it is over different qualities are needed: reason, patience, calm, a readiness to reconcile and forgive. Qualities that I find easy to associate with the patient suffering of Burmese men and women"

The fact is quick action could have been taken by a league of democrazies with their 30 years in the future militaries and humanitarian high tech to strike fast, kill or incapcitate xenophobic cruel despotries, rescue the dying and aid the perishing before the Internat'l Handwringers Coalition could respond.

Especially for humanitarian reasons - intervention in Burma for example - could have been done as media and communications were nearly out - any cries or propaganda from the regime's survivors could have been shut off early and easily. Besides - who really cares what slave trading illegit leaders or their fanboys say?

And that's the real case for the league of hot! democrazies - to tackle events as opportunities in the New Millennium.