What Sort of Honest Amoralism Would I Favor?

So, I have proposed a foreign policy of "honest amoralism" and at the same time said there are some things I am not willing to do.  What sort of "honest amoralism" do I have in mind?

What I mostly have in mind is a policy of making alliances based on mutual interests, with the country and not the regime.

What do I mean by this?

Well, let's go back to our old friend Jeane Kirkpatrick.  In arguing how hard democracy is to build, she was not arguing against toppling regimes that displease us.  She was arguing for propping up every friendly government threatened with rebellion by its own people.  She argued that if revolution was successful, the result could only be worse; witness China is worse then Taiwan (then a military dictatorship) and North Korea was worse than South Korean (then a military dictatorship). 

She is on to something there, but not what it appears.  Take for instance, we allied ourselves with Joseph Stalin during WWII because he was fighting Hitler. 

At least, that is one way to look at it.  I prefer to say that we allied ourselves with the Soviet Union in repelling an unprovoked German invasion.  Theoretically, our willingness to oppose the invasion should not have depended on the government of the country invaded.  Allying ourselves with Stalin did not have to mean supporting him against his domestic rivals, or buying his self-serving stories that everyone he executed was really a Nazi spy.*

Likewise, it seems a safe assumption that no matter what government is in power in Taiwan, it will not want to be invaded by the mainland or even "peacefully reunified" on mainland terms.  Assuming we agree, this is fruitful ground for an alliance.  We did not have to worry what kind of government Taiwan had, or accept Chiang Kai-shek's ridiculous claims that his was the true government of China and some day he would return and liberate the mainland.  We could simply protect Taiwan from mainland invasion and leave the form of government to the Taiwanese.

South Korea was a bit more difficult because for a time there was a significant pro-North Korean opposition, but ultimately the chances of anyone taking power who would actually want to be invaded by North Korea were not all that great.

And today, it seems safe to assume that very few people in Ukraine like being invaded by Russia.  Assuming we agree, that is fruitful ground for an alliance, regardless of the government in power.

That being said, we do have to hold our allies to certain standards.  Those standards should be at a minimum be that we can ally with the country, rather than the government.  It would mean, for instance, not allying with a government fighting a civil war because that would force us to take sides in its domestic government.  And not allying with a government was a large disloyal population willing to collaborate with a hostile power.  That simply means a civil war brewing, and we should stay out.

And of course if any country is starting to make a genuine democratic transformation (as Taiwan and South Korea ultimately did, and has Ukraine may be doing now), we should offer any help we can.  But the impetus must come from within.

_________________________________
*I realize that many people did, in fact, support Stalin against his domestic rivals and did buy the story about all his rivals being German spies, but that was not necessary.