Obviously, the best way the situation could have concluded was with the peaceful release of the Britons; anything else would have been unthinkable. It’s just unfortunate this happy resolution had nothing to do with Western diplomacy and everything to do with Western pride... And neither is this a condoner of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Holocaust denial or apparent eagerness to kick-start World War III with his aggressive stance on Iran’s nuclear program. No, this is something in between: a plea for moderation, understanding and acceptance... This could have been an opportunity for Britain to generate a little goodwill between the West and one of our most intractable adversaries. Instead, it quickly devolved into posturing and stubborn we-said/they-said politicking... Since when is it unreasonable for diplomats to be diplomatic?Answer: when one side uses the thin veneer of diplomatic talk to wage covert and overt war against the West, expecting the West to react with genuine diplomacy is unreasonable. International diplomacy is not a suicide pact, and even less so is it a game where one side has to obey the rules and the other side doesn't.
[Cross-posted to Mere Rhetoric]
No comments:
Post a Comment