by Eze Eluchie
With a view
to gaining respect and varying advantages in relations with other countries and
advancing their values as ideals worthy of emulations (freely or by compulsion), States across the world have deployed varying tools and strategies to showcase
themselves and their ethos. The foreign policy thrust of States serves to
define each country to the rest of world.
The military
might and combat preparedness of States are quite commonly adapted as a tool to
project State interest and advance foreign policy thrusts. Nothing more underlines
the seriousness of a situation, and is more convincing, as the massing of
military personnel and hardware just across national borders in a state of
preparedness for military action or the stationing of an Aircraft Carrier Battle
Group in international waters just off the shores of a belligerent or ‘non-conforming’
State.
Good old money,
in the form of international aids, loans, trade incentives, bilateral or
multi-lateral assistance also comes in quite handy as a tool for advancing countries
foreign policies.
Over the
past few years, however, Sex, yes the good old copulation of individuals or more
particularly, sexual orientation, has gradually been growing in stature as a tool
by which some countries seek to foist their values on others. This trend was
brought to international prominence following a direct threat by British Prime
Minister, David Cameron, to deny financial assistance or aids to countries
which have laws which penalize a particular form of sexual orientation, which
until the last decade had constituted a crime or anti-social conduct in
virtually all countries across the world. Britain, via the stance of its leader,
was in effect applying Sex as a cardinal tool in its foreign policy thrusts.
The European Union, the United Nations Organization and some other multi-lateral
organizations soon joined the bandwagon of entities factoring domestic legislation's and policies relating to Sex as criteria for international cooperation and collaborations.
Sex has
recently also been adapted by the Barack Obama-led administration in the United
States as a tool of foreign policy, with its pointed inclusion of persons who are openly of a particular sexual orientation (homosexuals) in its official delegation to the Winter Olympics
scheduled for Sochi, Russia in February 2014, apparently as a direct snub and provocation to
host nation, Russia, which recently enacted stricter laws regulating and
criminalizing non-traditional sexual practices. Prior to now, no one really bothered with the sexual orientations of whosoever was representing States at wheresoever. Calls, at surprisingly high
level quarters were, astonishingly, actually made for a boycott of the Winter Olympics over
sex/sexual orientation issues!
Reaction to
the deployment of sex as a tool of foreign policy has been varied. From the
total capitulation, via reversal of domestic statutes which criminalized the
sexual orientations and preferences been advanced by the countries which tow
this trend as experienced in Malawi (since the ascension to office of President
Joyce Banda), to tougher sanctions for sex practices considered anti-social in
some other countries such as The Gambia, Russia, Uganda, China and Nigeria.
One clearly
discernible irony evident in the approach adopted by the countries which are
spearheading the deployment of sex as a tool of foreign policy is the fact that, whilst aggressively promoting homosexuality, most of such countries still hold tenaciously to their domestic laws which discriminate
against and criminalize some other forms of sexual preferences and orientations – such as laws
against polygamy, pedophilia and bestiality, which may be acceptable nuances to
other countries.
Picture: Sex symbol
