Be a pattern to others, and then all will go well: for as a whole city is affected by the corrupt passions of great men, so it is likewise reformed by their moderation.
Cicero, circa 50 B.C.

Apparently Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and President Bush missed the old Roman’s missive on leadership. Their dream of “world” democracy can never be accomplished by the gun. Indeed, consider how well their rhetoric is working with China.

Last week in Singapore Rumsfeld publicly pondered, “Since no nation threatens China, one must wonder: Why this growing investment [in arms]?” The Chinese responded in their usual way, their answer was a question. A Foreign Ministry official queried, “Do you truly believe that China is under no threat whatsoever from any part of the world?”

It is abundantly manifest that no one is interested in attacking China, not North Korea or Japan, or even the United States. In fact, the reason China has a 2-million-man army is to control its own historically unruly population. But, before Middle East terrorism took center stage on September 11, 2001, China actually was the big threat America prepared for in the military exercises and budget meetings of the time. And, by the way, the United States does menace China, that is, if you count flying spy planes and sailing aircraft carrier task forces along their coast. Imagine Chinese military aircraft over Catalina or their submarines near the port of Los Angeles. Wouldn’t that be “menacing” to us? So, it just isn’t clear who’s menacing whom.

The reality is that today’s trade-based economic interdependence precludes anyone from attacking anyone. Despite the cacophony of saber rattling in Washington, Beijing, and Taipei, nobody can afford a war across the narrow straits separating the mainland from Taiwan. And democracy is coming to China fast anyway, via the pacific practices of commerce, WTO, Wal-mart, the 2008 Olympics in Beijing, the 2010 World’s Fair in Shanghai, and such.

So why Rumsfeld’s rough rhetoric? Simply, it sells well at home. Xenophobia has been so used by politicians to consolidate political strength at home since even before Cicero’s time. The problem is that harsh words yield harsh words. Brandishing weapons leads to brandishing weapons, and worse, using them.

Since Mr. Bush took office in 2001 the budget busting build of military expenditures has been menacing both at home and abroad. In 2000 we spent $301 billion on defense, in 2003 more than $417 billion (this ignoring the costs of the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan). And how has the “bring ‘em on” Bush foreign policy affected our so-called enemies? Over the same time period North Korea grew its spending from $1.4 billion to $1.8 billion, Iran $12 billion to $18 billion, and China $22 billion to $32 billion. The CIA says the last number is more like $67 billion. But, given the bad information the CIA gave us about weapons in Iraq, I prefer the Swedish estimates as above (SIPRI Yearbook 2004). Of course, China is now capable of delivering perhaps a couple of dozen nuclear missiles (of their 400+) to the west coast of the United States. Both North Korea and Iran have recently tested ballistic missiles and aspire to the prestige of nuclear weaponry.

Iraq? The war we started there is turning into a slow disaster. It’s been 27 months since we invaded and we continue to spend money at the rate of $7 billion per month. Of course, tragically, on average 66 Americans have been killed and more than 500 have been wounded each month as well. And the carnage continues with civilian casualties spinning out of control and 85 American lives lost just last month (May). There’s no good news in the numbers.

Nor is there a good solution to the conundrum of our own creation in Iraq. The costs of staying are clear. The costs of leaving are less so. Perhaps a Nixonian declaration of “peace with honor” would work for President Bush?

But I do have some advice for the President on the broader topics of national security and foreign relations. Recognize that even the bad guys around the world imitate you, so please set a different type of example for them. Your bluster, bullying, threats a la “Evil Axis,” and premature conflagrations are ruining our military and our country, and killing thousands around the world. Relaxing trade restrictions, as you did recently by permitting Iran to move toward WTO membership, is one effective way to promote global peace and democracy. Another would be unilateral cuts in military spending and nuclear weapons. The Russians and we each have enough nuclear arms (more than 10,000 each) to end all life on the planet, let alone China. Perhaps other countries won’t bother growing their expensive nuclear arsenals if the leader of the most powerful country the earth has ever known has the courage to lead by wise “moderation.”