D.P.T. (Definitely Pointless Theory)

Every president since Woodrow Wilson has utilized the Democratic Peace Theory as a justification to intervene with international conflict (Jackson DPT: An Appropriate Guide to Foreign Policy). If every country were to share the three core assumptions of a republican government, the world would find itself in a state without conflict or war. Regardless of the Democratic Peace Theory’s potential to provide hope for a peaceful future, the application of it still has weaknesses from beginning to end.

The political cartoon above describes the struggle for peace in the Middle East. While the truck that represents the Middle East Peace Process drives through the quicksand, it sinks as would any object struggling in quicksand. A keyword to define here is the word mire. Mire is an embarrassing state of stress in which one has to get themselves out of. As the Middle East Peace Process settles in the quicksand, it’s journey to peace is suddenly plummeted above the quicksand; there must have been an unforeseen solution leading to peace. Ironically, “the new start” seems moot because the truck remains on an inadequate, unstable piece of land representing a state of inconclusiveness. Regardless of any effort put forth to get to the peaceful

state, all the Arab turmoil eradicates the whole entire journey.

Considering all the elements in the cartoon, the peace process seems to be impossible. The maintenance for peace can be just as trying as the process of getting there. Just forming an opinion on the Democratic Peace Theory based off this cartoon leads many to think (especially me) that the approach has inaccessible goals. Transforming cultural norms and values to suit a republican government seems impossible especially in the Middle East. The Arab Turmoil seems to continuously disrupt the peace process because of it’s perpetuation of terror and inequality.

Every president still continues to apply the Democratic Peace Theory. However, the attempt to democratize areas like Afghanistan and Iraq on the notion that through “the expansion of freedom in all the world” would lead to peace seems impossible. Democracy is not designed for every country. It’s definitely not a one size fits all. Perhaps that’s why it’s taking this long for the Middle East to find peace as a democracy. The United States was founded on the three fundamental assumptions of a republican government. It persists as a democracy because these core values are what have been instilled since its birth.

The Democratic Peace Theory has great intentions, and I completely understand why every president has turned to it in times of foreign affairs. A world without war sounds miraculous. In order for the DPT to work, miracles would have to happen. Democracy is an organic concept according to Jackson. Getting a country towards a more democratic state is another journey all on its own. According to the political cartoon, it proves just that. Even if you somehow get a sudden solution to be away from all the mire, maintaining peace as a democratic state takes even more effort; any effort is prone to destruction. There are even more stages to democracy besides the initial transformation. The DPT obviously has it’s weaknesses from beginning to end. Should we continue to utilize it in our foreign affairs? Is it still worth to be applied as a justification?