Brinksmanship is defined as the pursuit of a dangerous policy to the limits of safety before stopping. When it comes to Syria, North Korea and Iran, it appears that President Trump is willing to employ this approach to his foreign policy. What is curious, is the fact that during his campaign Donald Trump indicated that he wanted the U.S. to avoid becoming the world’s policeman. Even then, his platform was and continues to be incoherent as evidenced on his changed stance on Russia and NATO. Putin was a good guy, now not so much! NATO was obsolete, now not so much! Worry about ISIS, not about Syria’s Assad regime. All that changed with the recent use of chemical weapons by Assad on civilians, including children.
I remember the Cuban blockade of Soviet Union cargo ships which was imposed unilaterally by President Kennedy in response to Soviet missiles being installed in Cuba. Fortunately, this scary example of brinksmanship did not lead to a full-out nuclear war because of delicate behind-the-scenes diplomatic negotiations with Moscow at the time. The U.S. had to agree to withdraw its missiles stationed in Turkey in exchange for the removal of the Soviet missiles from Cuba. Both sides came to their senses, and back room diplomacy saved the day.
The U.S. is today’s only real superpower. With respect to the proportion of its GDP in terms of military spending, it far outspends countries such as China and Russia. However, even though the U.S. currently has enough nuclear weapons to completely destroy any country, President Trump wants to increase its nuclear arsenal. Given such policies, one would think that other countries would see his position as a further threat to their internal and external political and economic objectives. Whether one agrees or not with American intentions, launching unilateral military strikes against countries or carrying out military exercises off their shores is being interpreted as belligerent actions. Moreover, saying that foreign regimes “must behave” sends an ‘inciteful’ message.
I would suggest that American behaviour has to also be in accordance with international laws and coherent foreign policy goals. The way to avoid brinksmanship is to keep open the lines of communication through diplomatic channels, including those of one’s allies. Canada and its other NATO allies cannot afford to sit back, wait and watch as this dangerous drama unfolds on the international stage. It is incumbent upon America’s allies to provide a stabilizing effect when confronted with any form of brinksmanship. As during the Cuban crisis, we may be able to avoid future conventional wars, and even all-out nuclear conflicts.
FROLITICKS 
Leave a comment