A patent-worthy recipe is shared with you for free.

You will be shown here how to take what you covet without having a title to it. Thereafter, proceeding according to the script and useing the decisive buzzwords provided here will complete the trick. If you follow instructions, after an outcry, those purring potential victims that you did not pluck will celebrate you. Accompanied by their grateful toasts to your restraint, you enter the hall of fame dedicated to the “struggle for peace”. (Int.nat.pat.pend. Franchises for sale.)

Indeed, even for first time do-it-yourselfers, the approach is easier to apply than it seems to the barefooted.

Begin the operation by finding two or more suitable territorial targets. One of these should be one that, as a starter, you really desire to gobble up.

Spiced with a load of the hot paprika version of politics, you put - exploiting the confusion of the surprised victims - the primary object of your desire into the meat grinder. Keep in mind: quick chopping is good chopping. Stir the substance with the help of your agents. Have their actions bolstered by the media run by “useful idiots”. While doing so, in the manner we handle eggs to be scrambled, pour the gook into a pan made to sizzle through your threats. The more outrageous your “non-negotiable” demands, the better. In this process, undertake visible and publicized preparations for the frying, more plainly put, for the occupation of the area, which is only your second choice. 

As a reaction to your signals of being, “provoked” by any sign of disapproval, a supportive “peace movement” of “concerned citizens” will arise. Supply it with placards and with vegetarian food. Their concern will be whether the gardening has considered the “feelings” of the harvested plants. To jack up the effect, while you mobilize, have official and officious statements issued. These need to proclaim your commitment to “harmony” and to “pacific solutions” to a problem whose immediate resolution in your favor is tagged as “indispensable”. Refer warningly to your unique “cultural peculiarities” and to your “national pride”. Amplify that by adding some visual impressions. 

To make his point, the “Leader” shall be filmed as he, with his shirt off, performs push-ups in the company of an attentive feline predator. (If available, a young center-fold-endowed female in a bikini will enhance the impact.) A leopard or a similar cat –add taped growls to bolster the effect- will signal resolution, fearlessness and vigor. The message is; the one that is not eaten by eaters can gulp you down.

The aforementioned measures will, direct the mesmerized foreign public’s attention away from our original surprise annexation. Now, political capital minted from the second area is to be nurtured. Identify there “abusive conditions” that demand immediate and protective “humanitarian intervention”.

You have noticed that, by now, attention has shifted from the original blow to the next object that all fear that it could be hijacked. With that accomplished, the time has come to announce the “gradual withdrawal” of the “peace keeping” troops from the vicinity of the land imperiled by “civil war” and other “turmoil”. Concurrently, these units are to be resupplied and reinforced. The otherwise inactive world will protest. The leading PC apostles of unconditional “understanding” that govern the other side will issue warnings about dangerously “hardened positions”.  “Sobriety” will be recommended to break the “deadlock” along with a warning directed at the remaining chicken in the coup, to refrain from “irresponsible counter measures”. “Overreactions” could provoke an “uncontrollable chain reaction”. In that spirit, “unconditional” and “accommodating negotiations” will be put on the agenda of a mediating “round table” conference to be hosted by Switzerland.

Foreign observers will complain about the dual strategy and claim that the military buildup shows that your promises are a smokescreen. When that happens, you are to keep in mind that the slumbering West resents it when the victim’s cry for help wakes it. The upshot will be the indictment of the victim that has caused the disturbance. To the charge of cheating, you react that the evidence presented is dangerous “cold war propaganda”. Such “insensitiveness” risks resurrecting “needless conflicts”. Furthermore, it is “irresponsible” as it questions your “honor” whereby, carelessly, the chances of an “unwanted clash” rise amidst “growing tensions”. For these reasons, claim that the critique is to be regarded as an “act of hate” that “blocks negotiations” by creating “distrust”. Complete the response with hints that such attacks hurt your “national pride” which demands “respect” expressed by acquiescence. Warn that “bad-mouthing” strengthens the “radicals” that challenge your “reformist” system. Supporting the “ultras” weakens the “moderate elements” behind your “policy of moderation”.

At that stage, the choir that likes to predict an “Armageddon” and the “destruction of civilization”, will sound off. Now the time has come to announce that, being “committed to the peaceful resolution of conflicts”, you regard, under the newly evolved conditions, the primary and “divisive problems” as solved. The evolved situation is stable if it is made to rest on the reasonable “compromise” of all parties concerned. Proclaim; “We keep what we took and promise not to grab more. Meanwhile, you accept the legality of our scaled-down demands and agree that, all positions are negotiable to reduce future tensions. It is mutually acknowledged that earlier claims can be the subject of future negotiations”. 

Reassurances are to be issued; if the tepidly phrased and implemented sanctions that were provoked by your initial land-grab are lifted, you guarantee the temporary suspension of the implementation of the rest of your original demands.

With the bounty in our pocket, you signal your relief that your “sincere efforts” to “preserve world peace” have borne fruit. “Consensual solutions” to international disagreements and the growing “mutual trust” are to be institutionalized. You conclude by approvingly acknowledging the cheers of the relieved public that can return to its soap operas and quiz shows. 

Having, through your proclaimed moderation, “saved world peace” and the globe’s peoples from the “abyss of destruction”, you book a flight to Scandinavia. Have the Leader measured for a tuxedo to be worn when he accepts the Nobel Peace Prize. 

Noises of protest by “warmongers” that lurk in the dark are still to be expected. Press releases need to be readied to counter those that castigate the prize and the deal made. This element is to be branded as “hard-liners” that reject the newly international “spirit of cooperation and compromise” which is the “sole basis” of overcoming the “deadlock” in the interest of a secure peace. The liberal press - only allowed in the territory of your enemies - will be grateful for the phrasing. Its pundits will confirm the correctness of our thesis about compromise in its learned articles.