When Leaders Confuse Brutality with True Strength
In the late 19th century, British explorer Henry Morton Stanley led the Emin Pasha Relief Expedition, aiming to rescue an isolated governor in Africa. Despite his noble intentions, the expedition was marred by violence and brutality against local villages. Many porters suffered from disease and starvation, and Stanley’s actions sparked controversy, even among his contemporaries.
The Fall of a National Hero
Upon releasing his book “In Darkest Africa” in 1890, Stanley expected public admiration for his resolution. However, he faced backlash as attitudes towards imperialism shifted. What once seemed like bravery now appeared as unnecessary cruelty. He confounded brutality with strength, marking his decline from national hero to cautionary tale.
Modern Parallels: The Trump Administration
Recent revelations about the Trump administration’s boat strikes against suspected drug trafficking vessels draw unsettling parallels to Stanley’s legacy. These operations employed military-grade munitions without attempts to detain or warn those aboard. Reports indicate that survivors of destroyed vessels sometimes faced additional attacks, a tactic described as a “double tap” designed to ensure total destruction.
Public Perception and Accountability
During his 18 years in office, the author witnessed various briefings on the use of lethal force. As a former ambassador to Turkey, he noted the significant global scrutiny when nations choose to ignore established limits on military action. Witnessing the lethal boat strikes is challenging to dismiss as routine, as they reflect choices that deviate from long-standing standards of ethical action.
Concerns over Transparency
The administration’s reluctance to release full video footage of these incidents raises questions. Citing national security concerns, critics argue that the true fear is political and moral backlash from the public. Americans generally do not condone killing individuals simply trying to survive at sea, leading to potential legal and ethical concerns surrounding these operations.
The Connection Between Leaders
Both Stanley and President Trump believed their missions justified any means employed. Each assumed the public would admire their toughness. However, democracies value humanity alongside firmness. They differentiate between necessary military action and needless killing; violence against the helpless reflects a disturbing abandonment of purpose.
Conclusion: A Call for Transparency
Stanley misinterpreted the sentiments of his era, mistaking public perception of heroism for cruelty. The question this raises is whether contemporary leaders are risking a similar miscalculation. The public deserves transparency and a chance to judge the actions taken in their name. It’s time to release the video, Mr. President, and allow the American people to evaluate the decisions made regarding military force.
