Would a "Broken Windows" policy work as well in foreign diplomacy as it did in policing America's largest cities?

It could, in theory, IF we had unilateral authority to actually enforce outside our borders. The issue with "Diplomacy" is the cultural ramifications of crossing borders to correct these broken windows.

It's one thing for a Mayor to cite all jaywalkers. To enforce every crime he or his agents see. It's quite another for us to "assume jurisdiction" in another Mayor's town.

I have no problem with getting rid of monsters. I really don't. We have enough safeguards in our system that those decisions can be made. We have "Diplomacy" to deal with the aftermath. But we must be cautious not to overuse the tool. The Article references Assad, and I would liken him more to a House Fire than to a broken window. That's something anyone can respond to. But how do we argue scale at the Global level?

Just because you have the biggest hammer doesn't mean every problem is a nail. Notice even though he cited Russia's Crimea incursion as an example of a broken window, he didn't give an example of any surgical, limited strike that would fix the problem. Same with Syria. Even now, while we claim to want Assad out, and for good reason, the possible worse outcomes of who takes over limits our options. And in both examples, there is always the very real possibility of an escalation of conflict throughout the region. It would be tragic, to continue to use his example, to one day find out that the entire city was destroyed over the reaction to one broken window.

It might work if there was a consensus among nations on which breaking of windows actually have a potential to affect the international relations and order CPT Jack Durish. This should not be a unilateral approach by the US. I would also never want the UN to be arbiter since they would go after low hanging fruit such as perceived violations of the UN convention of child and clean are or environmental issues first.