Distortions, lies and history: legislating a face-lifted past. Surprise: Bush wanted rogue states with nukes. Protect ships or fight piracy. What to do if conventional sanctions fail? What Baby Kim is really testing. Aggressiveness pays. Continued chaos, its beneficiaries and Near Eastern peace.

1. As an anticipatory kowtow to third world sensibilities prior to their articulation, some countries are considering sending forces to "protect" high-seas shipping. The terminology implies that attacks are to be reacted to in ways that make pirates retreat without needing to harm them. The implication is that when such actions dissuade perpetrators from completing their attacks, strikes will be postponed to be repeated once the conditions are more favorable. This means, like in the case of the slap-on-the-hand prosecution of domestic crime, that an alternative future victim is created.

2. In my alumni magazine (U. of Oregon) I detected a notable item. While it is not brilliant by virtue of its originality, it stands out due to its contribution to "decadence studies." A Ms. Cramer pontificates to potential donors that the North Korea crisis (developing nukes to be used against you) is what Bush wanted. The implied good news is that, with Bush gone, the problem is also about to disappear. Why did Bush want Kim to build his bombs and the matching delivery systems? Elementary, Watson! If there is no bomb, there is no excuse to build a missile defense system. Amidst the economic crisis, it is comforting to discover that this one cannot be as bad as it is reputed to be. After all, things must be OK if, for such brilliance, you do not only avoid being fired but also even get paid and — who would doubt it – promoted.

3. More about self-induced helplessness. North Korea and Iran are getting away with the impossible. Being tireless, both rogue states demonstrate that their threats to international peace are not the product of the misunderstandings of uncouth bullies. Incremental harassment will elicit, in cultures with a consensual and compromise-based tradition, the idea that greater concessions need to be made. At one point those primitives with their clouded vision, will realize that their "fears" are unwarranted. Therefore, accepting a peace framework is no threat to their existence. They will also realize that cooperation brings advantages, while confrontation involves unnecessary risks. In reality, Iran has reacted to the open hand extended by clinching her fist even harder. The excuse is now that candidate Ahmadinejad does not really mean it. After the vote the apology will be that, he must cater to his constituents. The same yarn alleges that Pyongyang fires rockets and explodes nukes because Kim's state of health has created a succession crisis. Later we will be told that the new man must prove that he is not a sissy. It will also be pointed out that past sanctions have not helped. The likely scenario without the limited sanctions remains unmentioned.

Our discussion should lead us to a thesis. If sanctions fail while something that cannot be tolerated continues, then measures need to be considered which are known to work.
Underreacting to provocations by pretending, "we show maturity by not allowing them to upset us" actions are encouraged that would, otherwise, be prevented. What does Kim want? He has already gotten much. He could have had "everything" had North Korea kept her agreements. Consequently, the theory fails that pretends that nuclear posturing is only a clumsy means to a diffuse end. Baby Kim is not testing bombs. It is the resolve inherent in common sense that is put to the probe.

While this is written, the Kim state — encouraged by its past experiences – is threatening the world with its preparedness to wage war against it. The writer can predict amusing reactions.

4. The newest long-range Iranian missile test implies a checkmate to a primarily conciliatory policy. Washington tries to solve problems by showing "flexibility," Europe  energetically prays for an easy solution, while Iran uses diplomacy to wage war by other means. Meanwhile, Ahmadinedjad is locked into a bellicose foreign policy, which has, so far, brought results.

5. As of May 20, there is a Medvedev-inspired commission against "Attempts to Falsify History to the Disadvantage . . . of the Russian Federation."  You see, there are attempts to question the pure greatness of WWII victory. A number of countries that the USSR claims to have been liberated regard that event as their transfer from German conquest to Soviet occupation. Now, like a kid in a tantrum, Russia stomps on the ground and demands that the past it depicts to its advantage be declared be beyond dispute. Pleasing myths that correct blemishes are to be elevated to the level of cast-in-steel, manicured truths. Brazen doubters involved are to be made guilty of the crime of questioning the victory in the Great Fatherland War. The proposed sanctions include the barring of entry to Russia. This should even apply to heads of state. Those within the country that harbor errors are threatened with up to three years of jail. Actions against people "spreading bad history" began with legal sanctions — as opposed to deserved ridicule – regarding Holocaust deniers. Let us wait for Tamils making it a crime to acknowledge the death of Prabhakaran. Regarding the Holocaust: the threat does not come from those who deny it. The danger's source is the majority that is unwilling to draw conclusions for the future from what it accepts as a fact that shaped the past.

6. The above makes one realize a few "notables" regarding the painful past. Some countries wish to have their past not recalled and so they themselves ignore it. Japan's dismal record before 1945 is an illustrative case. Others demand the acceptance of a past that failed to happen. Romania and its Roman origins — including the twisted implications for the present – and the Slovak's missing national history make the point. Others ignore the uses of their past. Croatia, whose independent national identity has not been questioned for centuries, before its absorption by Serbia, is a good case for that one. The Magyars are unwilling to fess up to their contributions to their collective misfortune starting with 1526 and including the present. As reported above, Russia insists on the exclusive right to determine her record retroactively. Some Jews insist that the Shoa be viewed in a way that reduces the magnitude of other cases of genocide. Germany uses the Nazi past to distract attention from other cases of misbehavior, such as the crimes of the defunct Communist East German state. In such cases, the face-lifted past determines current behavior. Whatever the ignorant detractors of the past pretend (it has already happened, therefore it cannot be changed), history manages to be about the future.

7. Can you recall the uproar about the unfair treatment of Gitmo's innocent inmates? Having been held by the bad Americans, correctness demanded that they be viewed as innocent. Now BO wishes to send them away. Oddly, now no one wants the liberated victims. Inadvertently, helping others to put their mouth where their foot is happens to be rich in lessons that are preferably ignored. How innocent are these people? It seems that the place and time of their capture are the best charge against them. Is it possible that someone, officially residing several time zones away, captured while walking an Afghan hound in the middle of a battlefield, is just an innocent bloke who happened to be, at the wrong time at the wrong place?

8. Near Eastern peace is more complicated than arranging non-war between Palestine and Israel. Peace's precondition is reconciliation among the Palestinians and a settlement between secular and religion-driven Muslims. A stable and enforceable peace also depends on a deal between heavily armed traditional tribal fiefdoms and newly invented central governments. This translates into functioning deals between new elites committed to the order they aspire to manage, and forces that are the beneficiaries of continued chaos.