Typhon Pact: Political Analysis

[Taran'atar]

Look however you want to dress it up, a serving member of any military force shooting unarmed civilians is considered a war crime in the 21st century - are we saying that Humanity has regressed in the future and this is no longer the case in the Federation? Are we also saying that Bashir as hyper-intelligent well briefed officer isn't aware of this?

Was Bashir acting as a representative of Starfleet during the mission? How does this work for spies in the real world? What happens when they kill civilians during a mission?

Just to clarify, I wasn't arguing the morality of Bashirs actions, I certainly don't think they were 'good'. He himself also didn't enjoy them. But from an operational point of view they were rational and understandable.

Another thing I just thought of: How do war crimes apply to killing civilians aiding the war effort?

 

[DimesDan]

How do war crimes apply to killing civilians aiding the war effort?

I would think they are fair game. I personally don't see an issue with killing someone who is in a facility that is creating things (say munitions or a new super duper quick mode of transport) which will result in problems for one side or the other in a cold or actual state of war. Regardless of the fact if they are wearing a uniform or not, they are assisting the war effort and will at some stage that will result in more death and/or destruction.

 

[JoeZhang]

How do war crimes apply to killing civilians aiding the war effort?

I would think they are fair game.

Wrong, unless they are directly involved in combat, literally holding a gun or the like, killing them without a trial to reclassify (The GC considers different groups of people to have different status depending on what they are doing and their associations) their status, is considered a war crime.

We can talk around this all afternoon but as described in the book, he commits a war crime.

 

[kkozoriz1]

Maybe. Maybe. But, there again, the guy who led that particular conspiracy is out of Starfleet now. And what makes you think anyone in Starfleet would even want to do it again? You seem to have this notion that Starfleet is just itching for an excuse to overthrow the government, and that's just not true.

Does the name Admiral Layton ring a bell? He thought he was doing the right thing as well. However, a coup is still a coup.

Spoiler: ZSG

What about when you don't know they're unarmed? What about when they still pose a physical threat to your safety? Those guys were not harmless prisoners.

Spoiler: Bashier and ZSG

"He thought of the hundreds of workers he had seen on the base's lower levels, the multitude of technicians and engineers and construction specialists, many of whom were probably civilians." - Zero Sum Game pg 263. Bashier knew there were civilians there.

"Sure that the other side of the passageway was clear, Bashier left the Ops Center and, as a precaution, fired a head shot into the third commando as he passed his body." Zero Sum Game pg 273. He also killed a wounded and unconscious guard. In a recent incident the Canadian Military just court martialed a Captain for killing an injured opponent in Afghanistan. He was demoted and dismissed from the military. The only thing that saved him from a more serious penalty was that he was able to make the case that it was a mercy killing. In Bashier's case, it was murder, plain and simple.

Suffice to say that the Federation has showin itself as capable as just as much "evil" as any of the Typhon Pact powers.

To a point. Certainly the Federation has never engaged in the sort of imperialism that many of the Typhon Pact's members have in the past -- no one in the Federation is oppressed the way the Tholians' and Romulans' conquered worlds are, for instance. It's certainly fair to say that the Federation is not as morally pure as it likes to think of itself as being, though.

In the case of Zife, they actually seem to be proud of it even though they are keeping it secret.

What the hell are you talking about? "They actually seem to be proud of it?" Where the hell are you getting that?

Seriously, re-read A Time to Kill, A Time to Heal, A Time for War, A Time for Peace, and Articles of the Federation. Re-read them. No one in those books is proud of the events stemming from the Tezwa debacle. No one.

You are literally just making stuff up now in order to paint the Federation in a bad light. You're doing the exact same thing the Typhon Pact does -- taking legitimate criticism and then taking it too far so that it becomes ludicrous.

Starfleet does not want to take over the Federation, and the Federation does not want to conquer worlds. You can separate legitimate criticism of how Admiral Ross handled Zife and of how Zife handed Tezwa without inferring from those actions that therefore Starfleet is out to overthrow democracy and replace it with military dictatorship, or that the Federation is out to conquer everyone it sees and transform itself into an empire.

After one coup attempt and one successful coup in the span of ten years, I think you might want to rethink just how pure Starfleet's motives are and how likely they are to overrule the civilian leadership in times of crisis. Once is an isolated incident. Twice is in danger of becoming a habit.

 

[kkozoriz1]

How do war crimes apply to killing civilians aiding the war effort?

I would think they are fair game. I personally don't see an issue with killing someone who is in a facility that is creating things (say munitions or a new super duper quick mode of transport) which will result in problems for one side or the other in a cold or actual state of war. Regardless of the fact if they are wearing a uniform or not, they are assisting the war effort and will at some stage that will result in more death and/or destruction.

Would you be OK with someone from another country setting off a bomb at the plant building the F-22? Would those people be "fair game"? If you're going in with the intention of blowing things up and killing the people involved (i.e. the people with the knowledge) then you declare war. Plain and simple. If you don't have the balls to stand up and declare what you are doing then you're no better than a terrorist.

Espionage involving the gathering of information, while technically illegal, is a part of the reality between two opposing powers. Actually, spying can be done between allies as well, as the case of Jonathan Pollard who passed classified American documents to Israel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Pollard

 

[BrotherBenny]

kkozoriz1, spies have to do what is necessary to complete their mission. The fact of the matter is that every Breen at the complex was going to die when Bashir or Sarina blew up the complex to destroy the ship. You may classify it as a war crime, but if the Federation were never to conduct a mission to remove the slipstream from the TP, and then a few months or years down the line a fleet of cloaked ships sneaked past Federation defenses and laid waste to Earth is that acceptable? That's what the Romulans or any of the others would have done and then billions would have died.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

 

[DimesDan]

How do war crimes apply to killing civilians aiding the war effort?

I would think they are fair game.

Wrong, unless they are directly involved in combat, literally holding a gun or the like, killing them without a trial to reclassify (The GC considers different groups of people to have different status depending on what they are doing and their associations) their status, is considered a war crime.

We can talk around this all afternoon but as described in the book, he commits a war crime.

Fair enough, I'm not fully aware of the in and outs of the GC, maybe the GC is out dated then and should be overhauled, when was it signed again, somewhen in the late 19th Century.

But yes we can talk about it all afternoon and argue the toss, in my own personal opinion, no he did not commit a war crime.

How do war crimes apply to killing civilians aiding the war effort?

I would think they are fair game. I personally don't see an issue with killing someone who is in a facility that is creating things (say munitions or a new super duper quick mode of transport) which will result in problems for one side or the other in a cold or actual state of war. Regardless of the fact if they are wearing a uniform or not, they are assisting the war effort and will at some stage that will result in more death and/or destruction.

Would you be OK with someone from another country setting off a bomb at the plant building the F-22? Would those people be "fair game"? If you're going in with the intention of blowing things up and killing the people involved (i.e. the people with the knowledge) then you declare war. Plain and simple. If you don't have the balls to stand up and declare what you are doing then you're no better than a terrorist.

Sure, if my nation was at war with the United States either covertly or overtly, then yes, why not, I see no problem with it one bit, same as if we were at war and a team of Americans came in and destroyed the facilities that create the Typhoon/Euro Fighter.

 

[Taran'atar]

How do war crimes apply to killing civilians aiding the war effort?

I would think they are fair game. I personally don't see an issue with killing someone who is in a facility that is creating things (say munitions or a new super duper quick mode of transport) which will result in problems for one side or the other in a cold or actual state of war. Regardless of the fact if they are wearing a uniform or not, they are assisting the war effort and will at some stage that will result in more death and/or destruction.

Would you be OK with someone from another country setting off a bomb at the plant building the F-22? Would those people be "fair game"? If you're going in with the intention of blowing things up and killing the people involved (i.e. the people with the knowledge) then you declare war. Plain and simple. If you don't have the balls to stand up and declare what you are doing then you're no better than a terrorist.

Espionage involving the gathering of information, while technically illegal, is a part of the reality between two opposing powers. Actually, spying can be done between allies as well, as the case of Jonathan Pollard who passed classified American documents to Israel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Pollard

You again did not address my points about what other actions Bashir could have taken? As I said and as BrotherBenny also pointed out, every Breen on the station was going to be killed anyway. So Bashir chose to act in a manner that maximized the odds of mission success.

The only alternative I can see is not undertaking the mission at all, of which I can kind of see both sides. Either the Federation does nothing and the Typhon Pact equips its ships with slipstream technology and gains an advantage over the weakened Federation, or the Federation stop them.
The Federation then decided it was in their own best self interest to hinder the distribution of the technology. Not particularly noble, but understandable.

 

[Christopher]

Wrong, unless they are directly involved in combat, literally holding a gun or the like, killing them without a trial to reclassify (The GC considers different groups of people to have different status depending on what they are doing and their associations) their status, is considered a war crime.

But they were involved in combat. They were working on the construction of a warship that would be used against the Federation.

What about when WWII bombers pounded Dresden and Berlin to rubble, let alone Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Most of the victims there were civilians. But it was considered militarily justified because in WWII, for the first time, nations at war mobilized their entire populations to assist in the war effort (as America did by having people work in munitions factories, donate scrap metal and rubber, buy war bonds, make propagandistic movies and radio shows, etc.). So the traditional divide between combatant and noncombatant had blurred. Even the civilian population of an enemy nation had become a threat and thus a militarily justifiable target (though whether it's morally justifiable is of course a different question).

Of course, this is a narrower case than that, but civilians or not, willing or not, the people Bashir killed were participating in the construction of military technology and were thus threats to the safety of the Federation. Thus, by military logic, they were valid targets, so killing them did not constitute a war crime.

 

[kkozoriz1]

Bashier's mission was to destroy the prototype and destroy all copies of the slipstream data. He wasn't under orders to destroy the shipyard. If the prototype was being constructed in a city and he hadn't had help from the Breen resistance would he be justified in dropping a half dozen photon torpedos on it? Do you really do anything to complete your mission? Missions have been aborted when civilian casualties would be involved. And let's not forget that there has been no declaration of war. Officially, the TP and the Khitomer powers are at peace.

The Federation has been at a technological disadvantage before. Steal the cloaking device to learn how to defeat it? Sure, that's within the realm of espionage. The TP knows about Slipstream technology and they have some very good scientists of their own. The genie can't be put back in the bottle.

Your true nature is revealed by your actions when nobody is watching. Bashier, motivated by his desire for Sarina, has allowed his true nature to be altered. He has allowed himself to become what he has previously opposed.

If you do not feel you should be bound by the Geneva Conventions you have two choices, you can attempt to get the signatories to agree to changes or you withdraw from the treaty. Simply ignoring those provisions you no longer feel bound by leads to situations like Abu Ghraib. You either live up to your treaty obligations or you withdraw publicly.

Let's not forget that Sarina also bombed a transit terminal in a Breen city. She did give a warning to evacuate but we don't know if anyone was caught in the blast. For all we know the upper level was full of people and they were killed when it collapsed. How would a similar situation be treated if it occurred in Grand Central Station?

 

[Thrawn]

HIS NAME IS SPELLED "BASHIR" NOT "BASHIER".

 

[kkozoriz1]

Wrong, unless they are directly involved in combat, literally holding a gun or the like, killing them without a trial to reclassify (The GC considers different groups of people to have different status depending on what they are doing and their associations) their status, is considered a war crime.

But they were involved in combat. They were working on the construction of a warship that would be used against the Federation.

What about when WWII bombers pounded Dresden and Berlin to rubble, let alone Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Most of the victims there were civilians. But it was considered militarily justified because in WWII, for the first time, nations at war mobilized their entire populations to assist in the war effort (as America did by having people work in munitions factories, donate scrap metal and rubber, buy war bonds, make propagandistic movies and radio shows, etc.). So the traditional divide between combatant and noncombatant had blurred. Even the civilian population of an enemy nation had become a threat and thus a militarily justifiable target (though whether it's morally justifiable is of course a different question).

Of course, this is a narrower case than that, but civilians or not, willing or not, the people Bashir killed were participating in the construction of military technology and were thus threats to the safety of the Federation. Thus, by military logic, they were valid targets, so killing them did not constitute a war crime.

Is it only military technology that gives the protection you claim? A 747 could be used to transport troops to a war zone. Would Iran be justified in blowing up the Boeing plant? Solders have to eat. Would releasing a virus that destroyed the American wheat crop and killed the farmers be justified? Where do you draw the line?

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were civilian targets with limited military value. They were chosen to make a political point. It has been argues that the bombing of both cities qualifies as a war crime. However, the Federation is the largest and most powerful government. They believe themselves to be above something like a war crime. That would be something that "bad" people do. When you're the "good" guys, you can justify almost anything.

 

[DimesDan]

Wrong, unless they are directly involved in combat, literally holding a gun or the like, killing them without a trial to reclassify (The GC considers different groups of people to have different status depending on what they are doing and their associations) their status, is considered a war crime.

But they were involved in combat. They were working on the construction of a warship that would be used against the Federation.

What about when WWII bombers pounded Dresden and Berlin to rubble, let alone Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Most of the victims there were civilians. But it was considered militarily justified because in WWII, for the first time, nations at war mobilized their entire populations to assist in the war effort (as America did by having people work in munitions factories, donate scrap metal and rubber, buy war bonds, make propagandistic movies and radio shows, etc.). So the traditional divide between combatant and noncombatant had blurred. Even the civilian population of an enemy nation had become a threat and thus a militarily justifiable target (though whether it's morally justifiable is of course a different question).

Of course, this is a narrower case than that, but civilians or not, willing or not, the people Bashir killed were participating in the construction of military technology and were thus threats to the safety of the Federation. Thus, by military logic, they were valid targets, so killing them did not constitute a war crime.

Is it only military technology that gives the protection you claim? A 747 could be used to transport troops to a war zone. Would Iran be justified in blowing up the Boeing plant? Solders have to eat. Would releasing a virus that destroyed the American wheat crop and killed the farmers be justified? Where do you draw the line?

Yes and yes. If they were in a state of war and Iran, The United States of America or anyother country carried out such an act, then sure, yes it would be justified.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were civilian targets with limited military value. They were chosen to make a political point. It has been argues that the bombing of both cities qualifies as a war crime. However, the Federation is the largest and most powerful government. They believe themselves to be above something like a war crime. That would be something that "bad" people do. When you're the "good" guys, you can justify almost anything.

It also saved lives, both Japanese and Allied. Now I could be wrong, but the dropping of the Nuclear bombs on Japan was the better of two evils. Japan wasn't going to surrender easily and the Americans didn't especially have the stomach for a full scale invasion of the Japanese home islands as it would have resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths on both sides.

 

[Christopher]

I should point out that I'm not arguing right and wrong here. I think it's a given that killing is wrong, that even a necessary evil is still evil. And I have my personal questions about the necessity of the mission Bashir and Sarina were undertaking. I'm simply pointing out that it's a mistake to characterize Bashir's action as a war crime, because there was a military justification for it. Although civilian, the victims were not, strictly speaking, noncombatants. I'm speaking of legality, which is a separate question from morality.

 

[Taran'atar]

Bashier's mission was to destroy the prototype and destroy all copies of the slipstream data. He wasn't under orders to destroy the shipyard. If the prototype was being constructed in a city and he hadn't had help from the Breen resistance would he be justified in dropping a half dozen photon torpedos on it? Do you really do anything to complete your mission? Missions have been aborted when civilian casualties would be involved.

True, but he barely managed to get to the control center where he set the power generator to overload. I imagine it would have been a lot harder to infiltrate the prototype and then figure some way out to destroy it. He also set the overload to take some time so that at least some of the workers could have a chance to evacuate.

You also again didn't really address my points about what Bashir should have done in the actual situation in the book.

And let's not forget that there has been no declaration of war. Officially, the TP and the Khitomer powers are at peace.

I would think blowing up a Federation facility would count as at least an informal declaration of a cold war.

The Federation has been at a technological disadvantage before. Steal the cloaking device to learn how to defeat it? Sure, that's within the realm of espionage. The TP knows about Slipstream technology and they have some very good scientists of their own. The genie can't be put back in the bottle.

I would argue that every day counts in that scenario, since it gives the Federation/Kithomer Powers the time to rebuild their fleets after the heavy losses of the Borg invasion.

Your true nature is revealed by your actions when nobody is watching. Bashier, motivated by his desire for Sarina, has allowed his true nature to be altered. He has allowed himself to become what he has previously opposed.

You are definitely correct that Bashir compromised his values. But I don't agree that he did it because he, to put it bluntly, wanted to fuck Sarina.

If you do not feel you should be bound by the Geneva Conventions you have two choices, you can attempt to get the signatories to agree to changes or you withdraw from the treaty. Simply ignoring those provisions you no longer feel bound by leads to situations like Abu Ghraib. You either live up to your treaty obligations or you withdraw publicly.

Christopher made a good argument that the shipyard was a legitimate target so the mission would not really fall under the GC.

Let's not forget that Sarina also bombed a transit terminal in a Breen city. She did give a warning to evacuate but we don't know if anyone was caught in the blast. For all we know the upper level was full of people and they were killed when it collapsed. How would a similar situation be treated if it occurred in Grand Central Station?

Nar, the Breen did not mention any casualties when she read about the incident.

 

[Taran'atar]

I should point out that I'm not arguing right and wrong here. I think it's a given that killing is wrong, that even a necessary evil is still evil. And I have my personal questions about the necessity of the mission Bashir and Sarina were undertaking. I'm simply pointing out that it's a mistake to characterize Bashir's action as a war crime, because there was a military justification for it. Although civilian, the victims were not, strictly speaking, noncombatants. I'm speaking of legality, which is a separate question from morality.

Just to make myself clear, I am also not arguing the morality of Bashir actions. I just think that the mission was a necessary evil. While I generally agree with the points about the Typhon Pact you've made in other threads, Christopher, that they need not necessarily be an enemy of the Federation, their track record in the four books is not particularly good.

Spoiler: Zero Sum Game

The Breen steal Federation technology and kill people. Not really very nice.

Spoiler: Seize the Fire

The Gorn really don't seem to have any problem with wiping out an entire civilization. Again not exactly model behavior.

Spoiler: Rough Beasts of Empire

Some factions of the Romulans want to reunite the Empire to gain the upper hand in the pact and crush the Federation. The Tzenkethi assassinate key members of the Romulan government to install a Romulan they like in power.

Spoiler: Paths of Disharmony

The Tholians manipulate the volatile situation on Andor to push them to secede from the Federation.

These actions, while committed by the individual members and not the Pact itself, don't exactly speak highly of them or present them as someone you would want to be friends with.

 

[JoeZhang]

Wrong, unless they are directly involved in combat, literally holding a gun or the like, killing them without a trial to reclassify (The GC considers different groups of people to have different status depending on what they are doing and their associations) their status, is considered a war crime.

But they were involved in combat. They were working on the construction of a warship that would be used against the Federation.

The GC is very clear about this, combat is literally *involved* in combat, the building of a warship that *could* be used in the future for that person is not combat.

Although civilian, the victims were not, strictly speaking, noncombatants. I'm speaking of legality, which is a separate question from morality.

According to the GC they were. Your justification is the same sort of justification that war criminals use at their trials.

 

[kkozoriz1]

Bashier's mission was to destroy the prototype and destroy all copies of the slipstream data. He wasn't under orders to destroy the shipyard. If the prototype was being constructed in a city and he hadn't had help from the Breen resistance would he be justified in dropping a half dozen photon torpedos on it? Do you really do anything to complete your mission? Missions have been aborted when civilian casualties would be involved.

True, but he barely managed to get to the control center where he set the power generator to overload. I imagine it would have been a lot harder to infiltrate the prototype and then figure some way out to destroy it. He also set the overload to take some time so that at least some of the workers could have a chance to evacuate.

You also again didn't really address my points about what Bashir should have done in the actual situation in the book.

And let's not forget that there has been no declaration of war. Officially, the TP and the Khitomer powers are at peace.

I would think blowing up a Federation facility would count as at least an informal declaration of a cold war.

I would argue that every day counts in that scenario, since it gives the Federation/Kithomer Powers the time to rebuild their fleets after the heavy losses of the Borg invasion.

You are definitely correct that Bashir compromised his values. But I don't agree that he did it because he, to put it bluntly, wanted to fuck Sarina.

If you do not feel you should be bound by the Geneva Conventions you have two choices, you can attempt to get the signatories to agree to changes or you withdraw from the treaty. Simply ignoring those provisions you no longer feel bound by leads to situations like Abu Ghraib. You either live up to your treaty obligations or you withdraw publicly.

Christopher made a good argument that the shipyard was a legitimate target so the mission would not really fall under the GC.

Let's not forget that Sarina also bombed a transit terminal in a Breen city. She did give a warning to evacuate but we don't know if anyone was caught in the blast. For all we know the upper level was full of people and they were killed when it collapsed. How would a similar situation be treated if it occurred in Grand Central Station?

Nar, the Breen did not mention any casualties when she read about the incident.

What should he have done? Destroy the data, which he accomplished. Attempt to destroy the prototype. If he couldn't then abort the mission. If we're supposed to oppose the Breen's actions at the beginning of the book we can hardly support similar action by the Federation at the end. Destroying the data would still leave the TP at a technological disadvantage.

Bashir wasn't motivated solely by the promise of getting together with Sarina but it played a part in it. He got to play spy, help the Federation delay the spread of Slipstream and impress the woman that he feels is is soulmate. It wasn't his primary motivation but it was defiantly a part of it. If Section 31 didn't feel that Bashir's feelings could be used to manipulate him why use Sarina?

The Breen also used one ship to carry out their mission to steal the Slipstream data. The Federation posted a fleet on the Breen border. It wasn't revealed as a fleet until the Klingons decloaked but it was still an escalation of the situation. This was not the Federation playing tit for tat. It was upping the odds and very nearly turning a cold war into a hot one.

 

[Christopher]

Spoiler: Seize the Fire

The Gorn really don't seem to have any problem with wiping out an entire civilization. Again not exactly model behavior.

Or rather,

Spoiler: same

a faction of the Gorn's military caste doesn't have a problem with wiping out an entire civilization. That doesn't necessarily generalize to the whole of Gorn society, any more than the actions of Min Zife or Admiral Leyton represent the overall mentality of the Federation.

 

[Taran'atar]

Bashier's mission was to destroy the prototype and destroy all copies of the slipstream data. He wasn't under orders to destroy the shipyard. If the prototype was being constructed in a city and he hadn't had help from the Breen resistance would he be justified in dropping a half dozen photon torpedos on it? Do you really do anything to complete your mission? Missions have been aborted when civilian casualties would be involved.

True, but he barely managed to get to the control center where he set the power generator to overload. I imagine it would have been a lot harder to infiltrate the prototype and then figure some way out to destroy it. He also set the overload to take some time so that at least some of the workers could have a chance to evacuate.

You also again didn't really address my points about what Bashir should have done in the actual situation in the book.

I would think blowing up a Federation facility would count as at least an informal declaration of a cold war.

I would argue that every day counts in that scenario, since it gives the Federation/Kithomer Powers the time to rebuild their fleets after the heavy losses of the Borg invasion.

You are definitely correct that Bashir compromised his values. But I don't agree that he did it because he, to put it bluntly, wanted to fuck Sarina.


Christopher made a good argument that the shipyard was a legitimate target so the mission would not really fall under the GC.

Let's not forget that Sarina also bombed a transit terminal in a Breen city. She did give a warning to evacuate but we don't know if anyone was caught in the blast. For all we know the upper level was full of people and they were killed when it collapsed. How would a similar situation be treated if it occurred in Grand Central Station?

Nar, the Breen did not mention any casualties when she read about the incident.

What should he have done? Destroy the data, which he accomplished. Attempt to destroy the prototype. If he couldn't then abort the mission. If we're supposed to oppose the Breen's actions at the beginning of the book we can hardly support similar action by the Federation at the end. Destroying the data would still leave the TP at a technological disadvantage.

Bashir wasn't motivated solely by the promise of getting together with Sarina but it played a part in it. He got to play spy, help the Federation delay the spread of Slipstream and impress the woman that he feels is is soulmate. It wasn't his primary motivation but it was defiantly a part of it. If Section 31 didn't feel that Bashir's feelings could be used to manipulate him why use Sarina?

The Breen also used one ship to carry out their mission to steal the Slipstream data. The Federation posted a fleet on the Breen border. It wasn't revealed as a fleet until the Klingons decloaked but it was still an escalation of the situation. This was not the Federation playing tit for tat. It was upping the odds and very nearly turning a cold war into a hot one.

But he killed the guards/engineers to gain access to the control center where he was able to corrupt the schematics. And he decided that the destruction of the prototype was important enough to justify his destroying the shipyard.

Sarina is definitively used to manipulate and compromise him. But I disagree that his actions on the shipyard were largely influence by her. At this point he thought that she was very likely dead or at least out of his reach. And judging from his internal dialogue his primary motivator was the welfare of the Federation.

And I agree with you, that Dax's actions on the border were quite risky, but not really so unlike the stunts other Captains have pulled before.

Spoiler: Seize the Fire

The Gorn really don't seem to have any problem with wiping out an entire civilization. Again not exactly model behavior.

Or rather,

Spoiler: same

a faction of the Gorn's military caste doesn't have a problem with wiping out an entire civilization. That doesn't necessarily generalize to the whole of Gorn society, any more than the actions of Min Zife or Admiral Leyton represent the overall mentality of the Federation.

Spoiler: about your spoiler

That is a good point, I did not mean to generalize. The Gorn are probably the least antagonistic members of the Pact. But IIRC of the crews of the Gorn fleet (six ships?), which contained more that the warrior caste, only one had any objections to their actions. And even he admitted later, that he is unsure of how he would have reacted if the civilization in question had been non-reptilian.