The Last Refuge of the Incompetent

"The Empire will vanish and all its good with it. Its accumulated knowledge will decay and the order it has imposed will vanish. Interstellar wars will be endless; intersellar trade will decay population will decline; worlds will lose touch with the main body of the Galaxy..."

So rests the fate of the Galactic Empire, according to Isaac Azimov's "prophet", Hari Seldon in FOUNDATION.

And in the face of microcosmic decay (the house is definately in need of being cleaned), mounting deadlines and midnight chorus of crickets, I have just finished reading it (again). I love that book.

Asimov's novel about the death and hope of the Galactic Empire is considered a foundational work (if you'll pardon the pun) of science fiction. But the book is compelling for a number of reasons. The titular Foundation is a small colony located on a fringe planet of the galaxy called Terminus. Its mission is to preserve knowledge and technology through the dark ages of the empire's decline and to use them eventually to usher in a new era of united galactic government. Small and unarmed, it must solve and survive a number of episodic crises involving its greedy, beligerent neighbors if it is to end the interregnum.

The Foundation is forced to use technological, economical and sociological forces to bring to heel its would-be conquerors because it simply lacks a military option. The characters are clever, cunning and compelling politically as they puzzle out solutions to the crises.

A recurring theme of the book comes from Foundation Mayor Salvor Hardin's motto: "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." Of course, it would be easy to dismiss the Hardin character as some weak-willed pacifist. Indeed, each episodic leader of the Foundation faces the temptation to press an obvious technological advantage in battle - none of the other planets, for example, remember how to harness and maintain nuclear power. Instead, however, they choose solutions which, not only avoid armed conflict, but also solidify the political power of the Foundation among the planets of the fringes.

Every time I read this book, I am struck by the idea that military adventurism is the last refuge of the incompetent; that "every blaster can be pointed both ways". This is the curse of countries with superior militaries: they feel compelled to rely on them. It is, however, a simple truism: Ground wars are not winnable.

No conventional army has subdued a hostile guerrilla force through military supremacy without paying a price disproportionate to the gain. Not in Viet Nam. Not in Chechnya. Not in Afghanistan. Not in Gaza or South Lebanon. Not in India. Or Ethiopia. Not in the American Colonies. Not in the Roman war in 90 C.E. against the Jews described by Josephus.

The war in Iraq is wrong because better solutions could have/should have been found. Israel's war with Hezbollah is wrong because it has weakened global perception that Israel's military is unbeatable and won them essentially nothing. (There will be no long term peace there. The IDF will return to Southern Lebanon before my daughter goes to high school.) The coming war between the United States and Iran is wrong because the United States can not afford it - and, furthermore, we should not have to.

We should send a copy of Azimov's book to every member of Congress and Israel's Knesset. Send one to George Bush? Why - He doesn't read anyway.