The Farce of “Diplomacy”
We hear a lot about “diplomacy” these days. It’s what the USA and EU are conducting with Iran – that is until the deadline runs out. It’s what the big countries are always doing, when dealing with smaller, less powerful ones.
But this word “diplomacy” has been redefined. My online dictionary defines the word as: The art of dealing with people in a sensitive and effective way. And again as: The profession, activity or skill of managing international relations.
So it comes as a surprise to realise that the diplomacy our “dear leaders” engage in is far removed from the above definitions – more like strong-arming, and even clandestine war-making.
Take the “diplomacy” being offered Iran – with regard to its nuclear programme. Essentially it’s this: move a good portion of your nuclear fuel outside your country and we’ll provide you with higher grade processed uranium later.
Iran balked at this and suggested they swap such fuel in smaller chunks and used a third country (Turkey) as repository. However, the West’s diplomacy was not that flexible and in effect they said, “Accept the deal offered to you or face harsh sanctions”.
Now, in the language of war even sanctions are considered a form of diplomacy. In fact anything short of actually dropping bombs is considered as diplomacy.
I beg to differ. I consider sanctions as a provocation to war. And in order to illustrate my point consider this: if America was to be threatened with sanctions from the Arab oil producers, and the sanctions were to be backed by force, do you not think the USA would take umbrage at this form of “diplomacy” and likely consider it grounds for starting a war? You betcha!
Here’s another example. Right now, a year after Operation Cast Lead by Israel in Gaza, the Gazans are still living under a siege.
Now in my book a siege is an act of war. To militarily prevent people and goods from being able to move in and out of the tiny country is tantamount to creating a prison. And don’t forget, in times past a siege was always considered an instrument of war. If you wanted to quell your enemies who were holed up in a castle, and you were unable to blast open the castle gate, then the next best option was simply to sit there and prevent the movement of people and goods either in or out, and wait until they starved or surrendered. A siege. A strategy of war.
But what really sticks in my throat is that when the hapless residents of Gaza attempt to fight back against this act of war, they are called terrorists.
This is the nature of diplomacy in 2010 and beyond – the continuing expansion of war (in all its guises) as a means of forcing compliance on recalcitrant members of the earth club.
All this is bad news for freedom at “home” too. To have the fake Nobel Peace Prize winner, Obama, declare that peace is the waging of war to maintain security, is straight out of my dog-eared copy of 1984. And provides yet another reason to consider such leaders, and the fascist/socialist state mechanisms they control, as true enemies of the people.
