Freedom is desired by most, experienced by fewer, threatened by many.

Difficult to establish, more difficult to maintain, constantly at risk.

Freedom is a pyramid-shaped continuum. Possible freedoms compose the base. Stacked above are those desired, then those expected, and finally those possessed. Present both domestically and internationally, every country is somewhere on this continuum.

We are at the apex of both and both are at risk. We have domestic threats emanating internally, which are easily dealt with compared to those international. Many countries actively undermine and strive to eventually defeat our system rather than adopt it. Their leaders benefit by maintaining absolute power from an ego, power, and economic standpoint.

Consequently, we and all freedom-based countries are experiencing an ever-increasing level of threat. Recent empire-building and economic strategies of Russia, China and North Korea serve to illustrate. No country is impervious. Distance, smaller size or historical neutrality are no longer inhibiting factors. Acquiring resources and expansion are their goal.

Like it or not, we are the protectorate. All others rely on us. Singularly they can’t defend themselves. As a result, we must develop an effective and comprehensive global strategy to protect and eventually expand freedom.

It’s time for all countries possessing a significant degree of freedom to band together and present a united front against all imperialistic and economic threats. Label it whatever you wish: Association of Freedom, Freedom Treaty Organization, Freedom United, Organization for Freedom, Security and Peace (OFSP). Name is irrelevant. Size and unity create the deterrent. When one adds the rest of North America, all of Europe, Scandinavia, Australia, New Zealand and some in Africa, South America, and Asia an imposing and dominant coalition is developed.

The organization would agree upon, confirm and establish common principles of freedom without negatively affecting each country’s individuality and political autonomy. This would include everything from human rights to voting. The sanctity of current borders would be confirmed and other responsibilities of membership established.

Obviously the most important would-be mutual defense. An economic or military attack on one would be an attack on all. Pre-determined and communicated consequences would generate a profound economic or military retaliation emanating from multiple geographical angles and sources (OFSP). An effective deterrent or immediate response.

Aggressive countries seek weaker opponents, easily defeated with insignificant cost and consequence. History has proven freedom is acquired and maintained from strength. This united front would require all members to share the costs of defense, both economically and in personnel. It would require commitment to training, technology, strategic placement of weapons, sharing of intelligence and infiltration. The generated deterrence would be geometrically higher than the status quo.

The OFSP would promote common economic efficiency and stability by granting free trade status among member countries. No tariffs. This facilitates mutually beneficial trade, significant monetary advantage and provides significant economic pressure on non-members to “play nice.” Additional positive impact would occur if 0% tariffs were replaced by a small mutual tariff of 15%, for example. This would encourage equal trade between any two members, balancing tariff costs. If Country A imported $5 million worth of product from Country B, Country B would be motivated to do likewise, eliminating a negative balance of payments situation occurring, replacing economic conflict with mutual support.

Other mutual financial obligations wouldn’t be required. Each country would continue to have their own currency, tax laws, business regulation, retirement procedures, governmental subsidies, etc. The European Union’s problems taught us that won’t work.

All international transactions within OFSP members would be based on the US Dollar; the status quo. Theoretically, the US could set the value of the dollar each day in relationship to other currencies reflecting each country’s current supply of money encouraging stability and discouraging speculation. 

OFSP members would have the “right of first refusal” for resources from other members. Members would prioritize selling their respective resources to other OFSP countries. This would keep most resources in the hands of freedom-loving countries. If one controls the resources, one effectively controls the what, when and where of production.

OFSP could restore process and consistency to immigration. Each country would set their own citizenship and immigration requirements and procedures. To facilitate, each country would have an official immigration office in every member country administering and implementing applications. Each country would implement their own strategies to facilitate assimilation. Strategies could include background checks, education in legal obligations, language literacy, development of marketable skills, sponsored employment or required vaccinations.

Other efficiencies would be facilitated: OFSP members would have common visa procedures for both foreign work and travel, mutual higher level educational access at a reduced tuition rate.

An OFSP would be the largest international commitment in history, but it’s time for freedom to take a stand. Without action, threats are guaranteed to increase.

The necessity for and effectiveness of an OFSP or similar is undeniable. Implementation is difficult. Overcoming nationalism and political extremism will require a leader willing to put their ego aside, take command, and do the work necessary to begin its creation. Currently, President Trump may be the only international individual that could pull it off. Despite his faults, lack of tact and occasional poor judgment, no other president since Reagan has taken overt action toward peace instead of hoping threats would evaporate. If not him, we must find someone capable of doing so. We don’t have the luxury of time. As the leader of the free world, the USA must take command.

Freedom is never guaranteed. Its maintenance and growth necessitate our taking responsibility for proposing and advocating a world-wide strategy such as the OFSP concept. Isolation and going it alone are not sustainable.

Bryan Whiting feels most of our issues are best solved by personal responsibility, common sense and an understanding of non-partisan economics rather than government intervention. Comments and column suggestions to: bwpersonalresponsibility@gmail.com.