George Rebane
Thanks to President Trump, we are again at a crossroads which gives us an opportunity to define America’s stand in the Mid-East, and a related strategy for a new crisp and clear global foreign policy, one understood by all to achieve and maintain a power balance that promotes peace and prosperity to a satisficing level. In the following I once more outline such a policy, this time in a structured format for easy reference in subsequent examinations.
- Overarching fact and fundamental axiom – America has been the world’s White Hat Hegemon (WHH) since the end of WW2, and has almost single-handedly created and maintained a world order that has enormously benefited all levels of humanity across the globe.
- Driving premise – Nevertheless, America has fulfilled its WHH role in a hesitatingly reactionary manner, never sure that its latest overseas foray is something that it should undertake or of which Americans understand and approve.
- Consequently, we should openly accept and declare that America sees itself as the world’s WHH who will use our wealth and power to consistently serve the national interests of the US and its allies. This declared role has no stipulated end date; it will continue indefinitely until the world order changes into some yet unforeseen and more benign format.
- America seeks a balance of local power in the Mid-East in which there is to be no single regional hegemon, a position now contested for by Turkey and Iran. We will most vehemently oppose the establishment of any kind of fundamental pan-Islamist political union among the region’s nation-states. The first plank of such a policy is that we and our allies will not condone any radical Islamist body to acquire nuclear weapons.
- We recognize that the maintenance of such a distributed world order of general peace and prosperity will require engaging in intermittent, relatively cheap (assuming we maintain primacy in combat technologies and force levels), and brief brushfire police actions (call them wars if you must). This will necessarily require the regular sacrifices by our military that will number a small fraction of the annual casualties we willingly suffer driving cars, imbibing addictive substances, and calmly accepting the annual toll of preventable medical mistakes. Nothing comes free, most certainly not life under a global government.
- In the current mid-east situation, we will get into a tit-for-tat (TFT) exchange with Iran – we will react forcefully to every Iranian attack on American life and limb in the region and elsewhere in the world. And we will also react with mutual benefit when Iran so acts.
- As the WHH we will consistently practice TFT when and wherever American lives are at stake.
- TFT has been shown – both historically and game theoretically (cf. iterated prisoners’ dilemma) – to be the most effective strategy for driving and maintaining cooperation between two contentious parties. The three characteristics of TFT are 1) never defect first, 2) when the other defects, immediately counter with at least as much force as displayed by the defector, 3) forgive immediately when the other party ceases and desists.
- When the lives of an ally’s nationals are involved, we will openly offer them ‘WHH services’ in that we will arm, transport, and surveil for them (i.e. provide logistical, sensor, communications, command & control, etc systems). However, the afflicted/attacked ally must commit to put its own ‘boots on the ground’ and in harm’s way – America will not risk its blood and treasure for an ally not willing to first risk its own blood and treasure in its national interests. Message to allies – as long as you’re willing to lead and bleed, then, and in concert with our own national interests, we will support your fight and have your back.
For the above outlined policy I humbly solicit contributions and criticisms before incorporating a refined version into the body of Rebane Doctrine.
rebanesruminations.com 
Leave a comment