It is unremarkable. Larger than Waiheke with just over five thousand residents who survive on mining and tourism. However. In 416 BC Melos was caught in a dilemma.
Greece was consumed with the Spartan/Athenian conflict and Melos was both independent and geographically in the Athenian sphere of influence. Athens demanded Melos’ submission or face annihilation.
Confronted with Athenian intransigence the Melians responded; “…all we can reasonably expect from this negotiation is war, if we prove to have right on our side and refuse to submit, and in the contrary case, slavery.”
To which the Athenians replied that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. Melos was brutally conquered. Such was the state of international relations.
In the aftermath of the Second World War there was an attempt to create a rules-based order to protect states like Melos. Bretton Woods and the IMF would regulate world’s money and trade would be orderly thanks to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
In the aftermath of Trump’s extradition of the president of Venezuela there is lamenting over the demise of this order; but did it exist outside the imagination of diplomats and academics? For forty years the cold war simmered with small nations from Angola to Afghanistan torn apart as superpowers fought for supremacy.
Once the wall fell we entered the era of Pax Americana. When nations like Panama and Iraq fell foul of Uncle Sam the marines were sent in. There wasn’t a single year US forces were not enforcing democracy or expanding freedom somewhere outside their shores.
The argument against what Trump did at 2am in Caracas weekend before last is that we have no moral argument against Putin when he invades his neighbours or that we should let the citizens of Venezuela continue to suffer so we can lecture Beijing on why they should not annex Taiwan.
This is nonsense. If we want to protect Taiwan rifles and gunships are more effective than rhetoric and grandiloquence.
The Rules Based Order was an attempt to restore the ideas behind the 1648 Peace of Westphalia where princes were given the freedom to rule unmolested within their realms as the price of peace. We traded the liberties of the governed for the avoidance of armed conflict.
It didn’t work.
This order didn’t save Afghanistan or Vietnam from decades of hosting superpower proxy wars. Hungary and Czechoslovakia from Moscow sending in tanks to crush dissent. Iran and Chilie from American meddling when their voters got it wrong.
And wars between minor states continued without pause; from the savagery inflicted on Sarajevo to half a million corpses piled up in the Iran/Iraq conflict; the rules-based order proved impotent. It did nothing to prevent the annexation of Crimera and although Putin is facing resistance in his further Ukrainian adventures this is a self-interested reaction by Western powers nervous about the Kremlin’s expansionist dreams.
There was progress in the area of trade. The WTO has been a net positive if we measure what would have occurred without it and not by its own standards and I am sympathetic to build capacity in things like the International Criminal court; even if the practice falls short of its potential. But on the Field of Mars small nations must continue to fight in the shade.
By seizing the president of Venezuela Trump has discarded the pretence of adherence to Article Two of the UN Charter; that declares that “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state…”
The liberal rules-based order is over in theory as well as practice and, as a New Zealand columnist I must now address the central issue of concern to readers; how will this affect Auckland house prices?
The old order suited our foreign policy. Thanks to the end of ANZUS and despite involvement in Five Eyes, we have successfully maintained a strategic ambiguity. Pursuing trade with China whilst maintaining strong cultural and economic ties to our American friends we uphold the fiction of a rules-based order to avoid commitment.
This is coming to an end and the economic consequences for Aotearoa could be severe if the debate over Taiwan moves from shouting to shooting. Our exports to China exceed twenty billion, compared to seventeen for the United States but we import substantially more from the Americans and the integration of our financial sectors makes disengagement from Washington more complex than ending milk powder sales to Beijing.
For the moment we can keep our head down and hope; which is why the foreign minister, the ever-wily Mr Peters, has merely expressed concern and “…expects all parties to act in accordance with international law”.
But when international law fails, as it has, we face the reality that confronted Melos 2,400 years ago.....The full article is published HERE
Damien Grant is an Auckland business owner, a member of the Taxpayers’ Union and a regular opinion contributor for Stuff, writing from a libertarian perspective
To which the Athenians replied that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. Melos was brutally conquered. Such was the state of international relations.
In the aftermath of the Second World War there was an attempt to create a rules-based order to protect states like Melos. Bretton Woods and the IMF would regulate world’s money and trade would be orderly thanks to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
In the aftermath of Trump’s extradition of the president of Venezuela there is lamenting over the demise of this order; but did it exist outside the imagination of diplomats and academics? For forty years the cold war simmered with small nations from Angola to Afghanistan torn apart as superpowers fought for supremacy.
Once the wall fell we entered the era of Pax Americana. When nations like Panama and Iraq fell foul of Uncle Sam the marines were sent in. There wasn’t a single year US forces were not enforcing democracy or expanding freedom somewhere outside their shores.
The argument against what Trump did at 2am in Caracas weekend before last is that we have no moral argument against Putin when he invades his neighbours or that we should let the citizens of Venezuela continue to suffer so we can lecture Beijing on why they should not annex Taiwan.
This is nonsense. If we want to protect Taiwan rifles and gunships are more effective than rhetoric and grandiloquence.
The Rules Based Order was an attempt to restore the ideas behind the 1648 Peace of Westphalia where princes were given the freedom to rule unmolested within their realms as the price of peace. We traded the liberties of the governed for the avoidance of armed conflict.
It didn’t work.
This order didn’t save Afghanistan or Vietnam from decades of hosting superpower proxy wars. Hungary and Czechoslovakia from Moscow sending in tanks to crush dissent. Iran and Chilie from American meddling when their voters got it wrong.
And wars between minor states continued without pause; from the savagery inflicted on Sarajevo to half a million corpses piled up in the Iran/Iraq conflict; the rules-based order proved impotent. It did nothing to prevent the annexation of Crimera and although Putin is facing resistance in his further Ukrainian adventures this is a self-interested reaction by Western powers nervous about the Kremlin’s expansionist dreams.
There was progress in the area of trade. The WTO has been a net positive if we measure what would have occurred without it and not by its own standards and I am sympathetic to build capacity in things like the International Criminal court; even if the practice falls short of its potential. But on the Field of Mars small nations must continue to fight in the shade.
By seizing the president of Venezuela Trump has discarded the pretence of adherence to Article Two of the UN Charter; that declares that “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state…”
The liberal rules-based order is over in theory as well as practice and, as a New Zealand columnist I must now address the central issue of concern to readers; how will this affect Auckland house prices?
The old order suited our foreign policy. Thanks to the end of ANZUS and despite involvement in Five Eyes, we have successfully maintained a strategic ambiguity. Pursuing trade with China whilst maintaining strong cultural and economic ties to our American friends we uphold the fiction of a rules-based order to avoid commitment.
This is coming to an end and the economic consequences for Aotearoa could be severe if the debate over Taiwan moves from shouting to shooting. Our exports to China exceed twenty billion, compared to seventeen for the United States but we import substantially more from the Americans and the integration of our financial sectors makes disengagement from Washington more complex than ending milk powder sales to Beijing.
For the moment we can keep our head down and hope; which is why the foreign minister, the ever-wily Mr Peters, has merely expressed concern and “…expects all parties to act in accordance with international law”.
But when international law fails, as it has, we face the reality that confronted Melos 2,400 years ago.....The full article is published HERE
Damien Grant is an Auckland business owner, a member of the Taxpayers’ Union and a regular opinion contributor for Stuff, writing from a libertarian perspective
5 comments:
Our Country is New Zealand not A...
What's wrong with strict neutrality Switzerland-style?
Confirming Anonymous (10.34am). Message for D Grant and for anyone else it might apply to: Don’t use the A word. Strict parsing and translation of the A word produces CloudWhiteLong. Do we want to change the name New Zealand to CloudWhiteLong?
What? We face a choice of war or slavery? Certainly things are going to get more tricky, and certainly war is a possibility, but not simply one of two disastrous outcomes. Prof. Hugh White addresses this situation head-on and presents a lot more useful ideas on how we might want to proceed from here.
Some time ago Mr Grant wrote a column saying NZ was a silly name and advocating the A name. He may be ''libertarian'' on economic matters but is ''on narrative'' on woke issues dear the Stuff heart; that's why he is allowed a column: a mildly divergent view on some things from time to time but nothing of substantial difference to give the impression of allowing diverse viewpoints. It is a Stuff facade.
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.