Connect with us

Foreign Affairs

Kurdistan and the natural right of self-determination

Published

on

Over the weekend, one of my fellow writers here at the NOQ Report, Ryan Fava, reported that Kurdistan is set to follow #Brexit with their own #Kexit.  The Kurds have long sought autonomy and independence from their Iraqi overlords.  And President Trump and his administration’s opposition to the Kurdistan independence referendum will not stop the Kurds from exercising their natural right of self-determination.

There is a fundamental question, for Christians in particular, to contemplate here.  How are we to respond to these independence and sovereignty movements, biblically?  I’m really glad you asked this question.

If our foreign policies are to impose particular forms of government, or arbitrarily and internationally determine borders, then I believe our foreign policies are in rebellion against God.  But if we support legitimate sovereignty movements and independence referendums, then we are acknowledging God’s Sovereignty over nations and kingdoms.

The whole counsel of God’s Word is a covenant standard for all of creation, whether or not all of creation follows it.  Nations and people who don’t, don’t to their own peril.  The law books of the Christian Scriptures are the common law, case laws, where God’s standard is applied.  In light of the New Covenant, there are laws that are discontinued (ceremonial), and the general equity of the moral laws continues today.

Does the general equity standard of the whole counsel of the Christian Scriptures affirm the natural right of self-determination?

I believe there are two fundamental passages in God’s Word that bring to light the biblical understanding of the natural right of self-determination.  The passages are Genesis 1:28 and Acts 17:26.

Genesis says, “And God blessed them.  And God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.’”

Acts says, “And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place.”

God’s Word clearly teaches the ultimate Sovereignty of God as Creator and the One who holds dominion over His creation.  And in His Sovereignty, He endows man with the authority and natural right of dominion to cultivate God’s creation.  In Acts, God’s Sovereignty is revealed in His supreme authority to determine the rise and fall of nations and kingdoms, but also His authority to determine the borders of those nations.

It is with the natural right of dominion that man also has the natural right to self-determine the national borders of the culture and sphere of creation they have authority over.  I believe the Christian Scriptures clearly imply that a legitimate exercise of the natural rights of dominion and self-determination is Jehovah God exercising His ultimate sovereignty to determine the boundaries of nations and kingdoms.

The #Brexit, and even the Scottish referendum before #Brexit, is an example of a people exercising their God-given natural right of self-determination.  As are the #Texit and the Hawaiian sovereignty movements.

The United Nations and the international community in the 1940’s are humanistic projects in rebellion against the natural right of self-determination. Because they arbitrarily carved up the Middle East and established the State of Israel.  And I say this as someone who is a strong supporter of Israel.

The global democracy projects of the Bush 43 era and Obama’s Arab Spring are not examples of the natural right to self-determination either.  In all three instances, the boundaries and borders of nations were arbitrarily determined by humanistic elites with utter disregard for the people of those lands.

If our foreign policies are to impose particular forms of government, or arbitrarily and internationally determine borders, then I believe our foreign policies are in rebellion against God.  But if we support legitimate sovereignty movements and independence referendums, then we are acknowledging God’s Sovereignty over nations and kingdoms.

Therefore, I fully support Kurdistan’s independence referendum and their natural right of self-determination.  President Trump and his administration should seriously reconsider its opposition.  Most importantly, I want to pray for peace and safety for the people of Kurdistan during and after their independence referendum passes.

Full disclosure: I am a supporter of the Texas Nationalist Movement and the #Texit independence referendum, as a citizen of Texas.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Foreign Affairs

State Department denies claims MBS involved in Khashoggi killing

Published

on

State Department denies claims MBS involved in Khashoggi killing

Yesterday, reports were flying across the news wire that the CIA had concluded Saudi Crown Prince and de facto ruler Mohammed bin Salman was involved in the killing of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The State Department issued a statement today denying the claim, stating no conclusion has been reached.

My Take

This is a lie. The State Department has seen and heard the mountains of evidence. The various cover stories put forth by the Saudi government have been hollow and debunked. They aren’t investigating further. They’re simply buying time and hoping other stories will help sweep this one under the rug.

Either MBS is so incompetent and disrespected that members of his own team went behind his back to murder someone, or he gave the order. The fact that Saudi Arabia wants us to buy the “rogue killer” is absolutely pitiful.

Continue Reading

Economy

Pacific Rim summit highlights strained China-US relations

Published

on

Pacific Rim summit highlights strained China-US relations

PORT MORESBY, Papua New Guinea (AP) — A meeting of world leaders in Papua New Guinea has highlighted divisions between global powers the U.S. and China and a growing competition for influence in the usually neglected South Pacific.

The 21 nations at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Port Moresby struggled to bridge differences on issues such as trade protectionism and reforming the World Trade Organization, making it likely their final statement Sunday will be an anodyne document.

U.S. Vice President Mike Pence and China’s President Xi Jinping traded barbs in speeches on Saturday. Pence professed respect for Xi and China but also harshly criticized the world’s No. 2 economy for intellectual property theft, forced technology transfers and unfair trading practices.

In Port Moresby, the impact of China’s aid and loans is highly visible. But the U.S. and allies are countering with efforts to finance infrastructure in Papua New Guinea and other island states. The U.S. has also said it will be involved in ally Australia’s plan to develop a naval base with Papua New Guinea.

On Sunday, the U.S., New Zealand, Japan and Australia said they’d work with Papua New Guinea’s government to bring electricity to 70 percent of its people by 2030. Less than 20 percent have a reliable electricity supply.

“The commitment of the United States of America to this region of the world has never been stronger,” said Pence at a signing ceremony. A separate statement from his office said other countries are welcome to join the electrification initiative provided they support the U.S. vision of a free and open Pacific.

China, meanwhile, has promised $4 billion of finance to build the the first national road network in Papua New Guinea, among the least urbanised countries in the world.

Continue Reading

Foreign Affairs

The Saudi predicament requires radical changes in our foreign affairs positions

Published

on

Saudi predicament requires radical changes in our foreign affairs positions

The United States is at a foreign affairs crossroads. One of our most important allies in the most important region in the world is being led by a man that U.S. intelligence (and pretty much everybody else) believes ordered the murder of a journalist living in our nation and writing for one of its biggest news outlets. How can we reconcile between what’s right and what’s smart?

Further evidence was leaked today that Mohammed bin Salman, the Crown Prince and de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia, ordered the murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul last month. The CIA concluded this based on multiple pieces of circumstantial evidence, including phone calls intercepted between Khashoggi and Mohammed’s brother assuring Khashoggi’s safety if he went to the Saudi consulate where was murdered.

CIA concludes Saudi crown prince ordered Jamal Khashoggi’s assassination

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-concludes-saudi-crown-prince-ordered-jamal-khashoggis-assassination/2018/11/16/98c89fe6-e9b2-11e8-a939-9469f1166f9d_story.html?utm_term=.718b2d26599cThe CIA’s conclusion about Mohammed’s role was also based on the agency’s assessment of the prince as the country’s de facto ruler who oversees even minor affairs in the kingdom. “The accepted position is that there is no way this happened without him being aware or involved,” said a U.S. official familiar with the CIA’s conclusions.

Among the intelligence assembled by the CIA is an audio recording from a listening device that the Turks placed inside the Saudi consulate, according to the people familiar with the matter. The Turks gave the CIA a copy of that audio, and the agency’s director, Gina Haspel, has listened to it.

This is much more complicated than deciding whether or not to punish Mohammed. The stakes are unfathomably high, including balance of power in the Middle East, a potential oil crisis that could cripple the world economy, and the future of a peace plan between Israel and the Palestinians.

Unfortunately, what’s right and what’s smart are diametrically opposed in this situation.

What’s right?

Every ounce of evidence points to the near-certainty that Mohammed bin Salman ordered the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. He was a permanent residence of the United States who lived in Virginia and worked at the Washington Post. While not a citizen, he lawfully earned the right to fall under our nation’s protections.

The right thing to do is to condemn the Crown Prince, even if that will irreversibly damage our relationship with Saudi Arabia.

What’s smart?

Based on the current geopolitical status quo, Saudi Arabia is our best proxy to keep Iran in check in the Middle East. They are also the reason the dollar is still the world’s reserve currency despite efforts by Russia, China, and other nations to change that. This status allows the dollar to maintain artificial stability. There are many factors in play that could cripple the dollar if Saudi Arabia and OPEC started dealing in other currencies, bur national debt alone would be enough to catastrophically collapse our entire economy if the world had the means to turn its collective back on us.

Saudi Arabia and the so-called “petrodollar” is the force that maintains the illusion of stability.

The arms we sell Saudi Arabia account for a substantial chunk of revenue and jobs in the United States, but more importantly it gives them the technological edge they need over Iran. If the Saudis turn to Russia or China, our influence over the region would diminish greatly.

The smart thing to do is to sweep this under the rug. Throw symbolic punishment at some sacrificial Saudi lambs and move on.

Time for change

There is no way to do what’s right and still do what’s smart, so it would seem the White House has to pick between the two.

Perhaps they don’t. Perhaps there’s a third option.

Even if we do the “right” thing by condemning Saudi Arabia Mohammed, ties will not deteriorate immediately. There will be a wind down during which time the Saudis will be looking for other partners and the Americans will be trying to salvage the relationship.

What if we didn’t? What if we acknowledged for the first time that Saudi Arabia is more than just the country that murdered Khashoggi. Their human rights record is atrocious. They have directly or indirectly harmed the United States for years, including a significant role in terrorist attacks. They spread Wahhabism across the world. If you haven’t heard much about Wahhabism, it’s because the radical Islamic sect that drives the House of Saud is protected from media scrutiny. See Network, which only partially satirizes the influence the Saudis have on U.S. media.

Saudi Arabia is a horrible ally. They’re necessary because we’ve made them necessary, but if we drastically cut budgets and spending, the economic ramifications of a break with them would be mitigated. It’s time to make deals with nations that do not smile at us in public and subvert us in private. Nations that do not like us, including Brazil and Venezuela, could be brought under our wing to replace Saudi Arabia on the oil front. It’s unimaginable now, but we live in fast-moving times.

Also, build the Keystone XL pipeline.

As for stability in the Middle East, it’s time we go all-in with Israel. They are the only true democracy and the one nation in the Middle East we can count on to not stab us in the back. They are capable of being the check against Iran. Abandon all talks of a two-state solution, work with Israel as our primary proxy in the Middle East, and make Saudi Arabia turn to others for support.

All of this sounds dangerous because, well, it is. The dominoes that will fall when we take drastic measures against Saudi Arabia will be painful. But there’s one thing to consider before balking at this. We may be heading in this direction already. The difference is it wouldn’t be us initiating (and therefore prepared for) these changes. Saudi Arabia has been quietly seeking a better deal for decades. They haven’t found it yet, but someday they will. When that happens, they’ll pull the rug out from under us.

We should be the ones pulling the rug. If we’re not, the permanent repercussions will be devastating.

Radical change in our foreign affairs stance is long overdue. Saudi Arabia is the worst kind of ally to rely upon, not just because of Khashoggi but because of everything else they’ve done. None of this seems feasible now, but it may be the only path forward.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report