The Curse of the State

The curse of the State is that the State must exist. Now set aside the brickbats, this post is no anarchist’s diatribe. Nor do I intend to say much about patriotism or nationalism—for now.

In this case, the State in question is the national state. However, much of what I offer here could be applied to many institutions, both public and private. To begin simply, the curse is the tension created between an idea, that of the State, and those who must reach out to the seated that sit in the chairs of power.

Consider this childlike—and you may think childish—question: Can you speak to the State? For example, imagine this phone conversation. Call the president’s office, or Congress, or even the Supreme Court, and ask to speak to the United States. “Office of the President, how may I direct your call?” “I’d like to speak to the United States.” Riff on what follows as you please.

An obvious “Duh” perhaps, but herein the rubbing begins. Of course, you may end up speaking with an individual vested with some authority per whatever power is granted by nature of a title, or statute, or election, etc. Grant for the moment my thought that to believe whomever this person may be speaks for the United States is, to be generous, disingenuous.

Let me free-range a bit. The Convention on Cluster Munitions (cluster bombs) was initiated in 2008, considered in force when 30 States ratified the agreement by 2010, and by last year more than 100 States were signed on. The cluster bomb is designed to release smaller bomblets so that the strike zone may extend much further than a single bomb.

As civil war wears on in Yemen, among the invested States geopolitically are CCM non-signers Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Russia, and the United States. Numerous reports allege American-made cluster bombs to have been dropped by Saudi warplanes on Yemeni population centers. Cluster bombs manufactured in the UK, an early adopter of the CCM treaty, have also been used by the Saudis in Yemen.

While debate over State security issues and military vs civilian targets continues in the US and the UK, certainly it would be fair for Yemenis to believe that these 2 States sanction Saudi Arabia using cluster bombs.

I would hazard that State policy on cluster bombs here in the US is a byproduct of no more than the consensus of a handful in the government. As for victims in Yemen who wish no ill-will but rather only to get on with their lives in peace—well, who are they going to call?

Comrades, in Sorrow

The Soviet Union’s military incursion into Afghanistan continued for more than 9 years (1979-1989). Estimates suggest 500,000 to 2 million Afghani civilians may have been killed by the invading force. Millions more fled to Iran and Pakistan. When the end of this misadventure came for the Soviet army, they had suffered 14,000 deaths and more than 53,000 wounded.

Communist party leader Leonid Brezhnev, who ordered the 40^th Army into Afghanistan, died in 1982.

What does one say?

Of course, there still must be Russian mothers and fathers who mourn the loss of their sons in that Afghanistan campaign. Weighed down by memories, like favorite meals shared so many times. Perhaps pelmeni. And brothers and sisters going forward with their lives, in sorrow over siblings killed, too, no doubt.

One may easily ask whether they question the value of their sons’ and brothers’ sacrifice. Or whether the country was a united front supporting Russian goals in the war. But, decisions were made from on high by a handful of the leadership. How it went is now a topic for historians to toil over.

Mikhail Gorbachev, final head of the Communist Party and the USSR, ordered the withdrawal of the Soviet forces in 1988 and then oversaw the dismantling of the Soviet Union in 1991.

And, one cannot forget the wives and children left behind who grieve their personal losses from the Soviet-Afghan War. Haunted, they may be, by remembrances, birthdays, a wedding anniversary, or a last picnic, maybe on the bank of the Kasplya River.

But what do fellow citizens say to those who were left behind with their sorrow? What do soldiers who made it back safely say to those families now?

In 2009, the Russian Duma (parliament) recognized the split in opinion over the war, but those divergent views they argued “mustn’t erode the Russian people’s respect for the soldiers who honestly fulfilled their duty in implementing tasks to combat international terrorism and religious extremists”.

Yet, in the final human analysis, what does one say?