"How did it come to pass that an opposition's measure of a president's foreign policy was all or nothing, success or "failure"? The answer is that the political absolutism now normal in Washington arrived at the moment--Nov. 7, 2000--that our politics subordinated even a war against terror to seizing the office of the presidency." - Daniel Henninger - WSJ 11/18/05
"the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts." - George Orwell

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

A Diplomats Job is Never Done

According to Arnaud de Borchgrave in a commentary piece in The Washington Times:

“The Bush administration wants an understanding with Iran that would end the conflict in Iraq. And Iran, at the highest clerical level, wants to end the 28-year-old break in diplomatic relations.”

“If Mr. Bush were willing to talk geopolitical turkey with Iran's ranking theocrats, putting diplomatic recognition, an end to all sanctions, and a non-aggression treaty on the table in return for (1) Tehran ending uranium enrichment and resuming full international monitoring of all its nuclear facilities; (2) ending all support for terrorist activities; (3) non-interference in Iraq -- a promising deal could be negotiated. But to insist that Iran end all nuclear fuel activities before the U.S. is willing to embark on a bilateral negotiating track is a diplomatic cul-de-sac.”

Demanding an end to all nuclear fuel activities as a starting point for negotiations is a requirement of the U.S. government; Iran has said, it will not abide by a demand of this kind as an onset to talks. Regardless of a “cul-de-sac” or any other kind of sac, Tehran will not likely end its uranium enrichment activities, nor would it end support for terrorism; terrorism is and has taken Iran to the point that it is today in the international arena. Terrorism, in the mind of the Mullahs and words of Ahmadinejad is what will help them unite the Islamic world in its quest to defeat all that is infidel.

From two countries involved in the EU-3 negotiations with Iran (Russia involved, but not really counted in the numerical number), comes the opinion by a number of British and Russian experts that believe:

Iran will test a North Korean-designed, plutonium-based nuclear device underground in the fall. Others among the same group of experts say it will be an enriched uranium device fueled by pre-enriched uranium feed stock obtained on the international black market.”

Plutonium or uranium is not the point; with the negotiations responsibility handed to these nations, a farce from the beginning has resulted in no results. From the beginning, the nations involved have played the diplomacy game knowing full well what the diplomacy game ends in. Talk is cheap, talk often leads to nothing but a delay of something bigger and nastier.

Experts now see possibilities of Iranian success in nuclear development. Why even the ever prescient Mohamed ElBaradei openly sees the light, the light that he would not admit existed in the run up to the endless chattering. Personally I do not believe he ever had any intention of stopping the Iranian “peaceful nuke” game. That is not the job of a diplomat; their job is to talk and agree, regardless of the results. If they talk, they have succeeded and no doubt El Baradei sees accomplishment. Following the U.N. and others taking action, El Baradei today announces the tough love truth:

‘“We believe they pretty much have the knowledge about how to enrich. From now on, it is simply a question of perfecting that knowledge. People will not like to hear it, but that’s a fact.”’

Some European nations along with Russia are beginning to see that new sanctions are pointless citing the logic:

“of demanding suspension was that it would delay the day that Iran gained the knowledge to produce its own nuclear fuel.”

If there was ever logic to the diplomacy and sanctions, why did Russia and others do so much to thwart these efforts? Why not do it while it was logical? Could it be that they were too interested in talking?

The entire situation is one of diplomatic circles playing with words, enjoying wonderful catered meals, posh hotels, self-importance and regardless of outcome a job well done.

Speaking for the great, respected and tough organization that is the U.N., El Baradei points out that:

‘“Quite clearly suspension is a requirement by the Security Council, and I would hope the Iranians would listen to the world community.”'

Yes, I would hope; that and UN-esque diplomacy will get you a big fat zero or if you are Iran a new vantage point that requires the international organization to view it, according to El Baradei from the perspective of proliferation since:

‘“the fact of the matter is that one of the purposes of suspension — keeping them from getting the knowledge — has been overtaken by events.”’

Missing from El Baradei is any sense of irony that he and his cohorts are the very ones responsible for the events outpacing talks. Outpacing talks is never a challenge; consider the EU’s agreement with the Mullahs regarding “peaceful nukes,” that is laying of the groundwork for the 2010 conference. Sounds like this is kind of behind the eight ball as well, no? Not really, at least not according to an esteemed diplomat like El Baradei:

‘“The focus now should be to stop them from going to industrial scale production, to allow us to do a full-court-press inspection and to be sure they remain inside the treaty.”

Basketball analogies or not, the game they are playing for us is over; the game they are playing for a paycheck is not. It is no wonder that a diplomats job is never done.

El Baradei

United Nations

  • DeMediacratic Nation Blogrolls

    Please give this Post/Blog a Vote - Top Blogs

    © blogger templates 3 column | Webtalks