March 25, 2011--Ladies of Forest Trace: The Family of Nations

“I know you’re coming here later to take me to Publix—I need fruit and some milk to drink with my Ensure—but I don’t want to spoil the visit by talking about politics, and so I’m calling.”

“That’s all right mom. I’m happy to talk with you about anything any time in person or on the phone.”

“You’re such a good boy.”

“Have the ladies been upsetting you again over dinner or is it something you saw on television.”

“Both.”

“You know I’ve suggested that you don’t watch TV all the time. Especially CNN. For them it’s always Breaking News, Breaking News, even . . .”

“Yes, I know. You’ve said it a hundred times—that since they have to fill up 24 hours with new news to keep us watching, and since there isn’t always something new to report, they repeat the same thing over and over again and call it breaking news.”

“Exactly. And it winds up upsetting you since you’re inclined to think that the bad news never ends even after you’ve heard the same thing six times.”

“And the girls were talking about the same thing last night at dinner.”

“What same thing is that, mom?”

“What they were saying on CNN and what Bertha was reading in her New York Times, which, as you know, she gets every day even though they raised the prices for the paper but not her Social Security.”

“As I said, whatever you prefer. We can talk about it now or . . .”

“Now.”

“Fine.”

“It started the night before with that Sprtizer announcer.”

“Spritzer announcer? I’m not sure I . . . “

“On CNN. At 8 o’clock.”

“Oh, you mean Eliot Spitzer. Not Spritzer.”

“Spitzer, Spritzer, whatever you want. But from what he did to his wife, poor thing, to me he’s more a Spritzer.” She laughed at her own joke. “Though he’s very smart and I enjoy watching him. But like I was saying, what he was talking about with one of his guests was Libya. Everybody is talking about that. No more talk about the economy or thank God Sarah Palin. All the time Libya. Which I understand,” she quickly added before I could get in a word about why it makes sense now to be dealing with Libya.

“What about Libya, mom, is so upsetting you?”

“The conversation about why we are bombing them and not other places where the dictators are worse, where more people have been killed by their own government.”

“I’ve too have been hearing that and thinking about it.”

“How, Obama’s critics are asking—and by now every one is criticizing him, even from his own party—how can he pick one place to help and not another. Egypt and Libya but not Yemen or that Bah place.”

“Bahrain. There are of course reasons that . . .”

“They are talking about those reasons on TV and Bertha keeps telling us what her New York Times is writing. What Tom Freeman says.” I didn’t correct her because in general I like the malaprop names she comes up with.

“They are all saying that if we are doing these things for humanitarian reasons aren’t there worse places where we should be helping? Like I said in Yemen or that place next to South Africa.”

“Zimbabwe.”

“Yes, there. Don’t they have a terrible president there?

“Yes, Mugabe.”

“Hasn’t he been a tyrant?”

“In many ways yes. He has become one. He started out as . . .”

“And so, why not Zimway?”

“If you mean intervene, I can’t see making a strong case to do that there because . . .”

“There’s always a because. There’s a because when we get involved and then there is another because when we don’t. That’s exactly the point I am trying to make.”

“Please do so since this is very complicated. To be consistent, if that’s our goal, either we should stay out of all situations of this kind or get involved everywhere there is a brutal dictator. But then, when we do choose to get involved, people are legitimately asking, is there appropriate justification to do so; and if there is, what kind of process should we go through to make the case and get the approvals needed. Like from the UN or our own Congress.”

“So you’ve been watching CNN too--and I know you read the Times every day—and are asking the same questions. Questions we have enough of, but do we have any answers?”

She paused to allow me to offer some. I am afraid I did not have any good ones to share.

“You’re making my point for me. Even you do not know how to think about this.”

“And what about you,” I ventured, “You’ve been watching the news nonstop and talking with the ladies, who keep on top of things.”

“To me it’s complicated but also very simple.”

“This I am eager to hear.”

“Think about the world as a family. Like our family. A family of nations. Like in our family some of us are closer to each other than to others; and as with us, mainly in the past, they don’t get along very well. They at times have feuds. Family feuds.”

“But, mom, at times, like now, like always, nations also fight with each other, kill each other; and, as in some sad situations, the people within a country fight with and kill each other. In civil wars. Like ours. Maybe like now in Libya.”

“I know darling that I’m making things too simple, but I am trying to make a point so please let me finish. I’m almost 103 and not as quick as I used to be.”

“No, mom, you’re . . .”

“I know what I am and, to tell you the truth, it’s not that good.”

“OK, I hear you. I won’t say another word.”

“I’m talking about how to decide when to help. When someone in the family needs help or says they need help. Do we ignore them? Do we simply help everyone, regardless of their circumstances? Just because they’re family?” She paused as if to let me respond but I remained silent so as not to interrupt her.

“This happened only a few years ago. You remember, don’t you?” In fact I did but again didn’t respond. “One of our family members, I will not be mentioning names, wrote to all of us to tell us that he was going to have another child and needed help to buy another house. We decided not to give him any money. We felt that he had made some bad choices in his life that caused him to be in this circumstance and, when we looked into the matter, we found that the house he was living in really was adequate for his family, even with another child. I think it was you or one of my sisters, who was a very generous person, who said that he doesn’t need a new apartment but that he wants one. You made a distinction between needing and wanting. We agreed that if he needed a new place, really needed one and couldn’t manage it himself, we would try to be helpful. But, then again, I reminded myself about the things he had chosen to do with his life, how he was responsible for his own financial condition.”

“I do remember that and, though it was difficult not to get involved—he was a family member after all—I came to the same conclusion.”

“But then a few years later we agreed to help someone else. They also did things to cause them to need help but the things they did were to try to be generous to others and this had contributed to problems of their own.”

“And another thing, mom, though this is difficult to acknowledge, didn’t we feel closer to them? Hadn’t we a much longer history of involvement with them than with the first person you mentioned who had drifted away and with whom we had hardly much of a relationship at all?”

“You’re making my point for me. Yes. Not every relationship, even within a close family such as ours, is the same. We don’t have the same feelings for everyone even though they may be a cousin or a niece or nephew or even a sister.”

“As you’re saying, it is very difficult in these kinds of circumstances to think about what to do.”

“So, like Obama, or any president, we don’t act consistently but we do act. In the family, we, like him, also have to take into consideration if we have the ability to be helpful. And, as they are saying about Libya, coming back to that, they are claiming that with our planes and missiles, and considering what is needed to help prevent a slaughter of the rebels, that with these we can he very helpful and that we don’t have to be involved for months or years. Of course we’ll see if that turns out to be true. But, again, as when we try to help family members we are never sure if what we do is actually going to provide the help they need.”

“I think I am getting your point. The analogy is not perfect, nations are not the same as families, but it is a useful way to think about the situation.”

“There is yet another complication, and I am sure many more because I am not an expert about this, but self-interest also has to be taken into consideration. Maybe not exactly has to, but always seems to be part of the decision. Our self-interest is not the same in all places and since we can’t get involved in all places, in addition to what we have been talking about, being concerned about what’s good for us, for America, is very important.”

“Experts call this realpolitik.”

“This is an idea about which I also have been hearing. And therefore self-interest gets us in trouble when we claim that our involvement is for humanitarian reasons. If we make that our justification then we have to get involved everywhere there are dictators abusing their own people.”

“Again, I agree with this. But one more thing—how does this apply to the family?”

“What apply?”

“Is there self-interest for us in what we do or don’t do to help family members who may have needs? That would make our involvement very different than doing things out of only concern and love.”

“That is an excellent question to which I do not have an answer. Maybe, when you’re here, or when you’re taking me to Publix, we could come up with one. Though, about that, I am not so sure.”

* * *

I should report that though we got the milk and some ripe peaches we have not as yet been able to resolve that one. My mother, though, promises to think more about it.