Unfortunately, the western hegemony has learned well the least edifying lesson of European history and politics; war is an immensely profitable business.
If we - the people of the West - want to end the wars of choice of our rulers then we have to take the profits out of it. Preferably replace them with penalties.
No noble sentiments nor peaceful intentions can be a long term substitute for hard incentives.
As I see it, the problem is that western elites have lost all sense of what a diplomat is & why diplomacy is necessary in the first place.
Just my take, but the starting point is to acknowledge a sad and uncomfortable truth : an "iron law" of human nature : that conflict, hostility and war is the natural state of things between human beings.
It's not "if" hostility will break out between humans, or collections of humans (eg tribes or societies). It's "when" - conflict is guaranteed, because again it's the natural state of things.
The paradox is that we humans have also learned that preventing what is natural to humans (war, conflict and hostility) is worth it : on balance, we know that better outcomes result when humans are prevented/persuaded from behaving naturally.
Enter the diplomat & the role of diplomacy (as I see it, anyway) - and why diplomacy is so difficult, but so important.
True diplomacy requires doing all things necessary to prevent the natural state of things from reasserting itself, by persuading often very powerful actors that it's in their best interests to restrain their natural instincts.
That is a supremely difficult job and in certain situations, very dangerous, especially if it involves a diplomat having to disagree with a more powerful actor (eg political masters).
When it comes to conflict between nations, the task is even more complex. Diplomats from both sides must work together to focus on that one objective: to do all things necessary to prevent the natural state of things from reasserting itself, in that context, war.
Restraining powerful actors in conflict requires special skills. At a minimum, true diplomats have to be able to at least converse in each other's languages, which you have correctly diagnosed as a major deficiency in western diplomatic corps.
The very best diplomats also have an extensive grasp of the other sides culture and history - leading to an understanding of that actors perspective. They also have the ability to communicate with their own leaders in a way that has persuasive power.
Western diplomatic corps don't have those skills these days, but more importantly they also don't understand the iron law of human nature. As a result, they're not engaging in diplomacy at all - most are little more than political apparatchiks, little attack chihuahuas doing the bidding of their masters, and the exact opposite of what their job is.
Far from preventing the natural state of things from reasserting itself (war, conflict , hostility) they in fact do everything they can to enable it to reassert itself.
Far from doing everything possible to prevent opposing parties from behaving naturally (conflict) and to persuade them that better outcomes will result from restraint, these modern day popinjays instead act as advocates for their masters, again simply enabling conflict to arise.
A tragic example of the collapse of western diplomacy is the deceit and duplicity of America/Israel's hoodwinking of Iran. Here we have the western diplomatic corps essentially acting as con artists, slavishly doing the bidding of their political masters, engaging in a pre-planned scheme of deceit and lies, aimed at hoodwinking the Iranians into a potential nuclear deal, while knowing that a surprise attack & war was being planned.
An absolute disgrace, which will lead to disaster for the West. But a useful example of the state of western "diplomacy" these days.
Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised, though - again, all these "diplomats" were doing is behaving naturally.
Washington does not understand diplomacy! Never has, and possibly never will. Our leaders are like petulant children who scream and kick, like spoiled children in a toy store when they do not get their every demand.
Often the primary aim of diplomacy seems to be starting a war, as in1938-39, when the US and UK persuaded Poland not to accede to Germany's reasonable demands on Danzig by claiming the German army was weak.....
Unfortunately, the western hegemony has learned well the least edifying lesson of European history and politics; war is an immensely profitable business.
If we - the people of the West - want to end the wars of choice of our rulers then we have to take the profits out of it. Preferably replace them with penalties.
No noble sentiments nor peaceful intentions can be a long term substitute for hard incentives.
Fantastic analysis, as usual.
As I see it, the problem is that western elites have lost all sense of what a diplomat is & why diplomacy is necessary in the first place.
Just my take, but the starting point is to acknowledge a sad and uncomfortable truth : an "iron law" of human nature : that conflict, hostility and war is the natural state of things between human beings.
It's not "if" hostility will break out between humans, or collections of humans (eg tribes or societies). It's "when" - conflict is guaranteed, because again it's the natural state of things.
The paradox is that we humans have also learned that preventing what is natural to humans (war, conflict and hostility) is worth it : on balance, we know that better outcomes result when humans are prevented/persuaded from behaving naturally.
Enter the diplomat & the role of diplomacy (as I see it, anyway) - and why diplomacy is so difficult, but so important.
True diplomacy requires doing all things necessary to prevent the natural state of things from reasserting itself, by persuading often very powerful actors that it's in their best interests to restrain their natural instincts.
That is a supremely difficult job and in certain situations, very dangerous, especially if it involves a diplomat having to disagree with a more powerful actor (eg political masters).
When it comes to conflict between nations, the task is even more complex. Diplomats from both sides must work together to focus on that one objective: to do all things necessary to prevent the natural state of things from reasserting itself, in that context, war.
Restraining powerful actors in conflict requires special skills. At a minimum, true diplomats have to be able to at least converse in each other's languages, which you have correctly diagnosed as a major deficiency in western diplomatic corps.
The very best diplomats also have an extensive grasp of the other sides culture and history - leading to an understanding of that actors perspective. They also have the ability to communicate with their own leaders in a way that has persuasive power.
Western diplomatic corps don't have those skills these days, but more importantly they also don't understand the iron law of human nature. As a result, they're not engaging in diplomacy at all - most are little more than political apparatchiks, little attack chihuahuas doing the bidding of their masters, and the exact opposite of what their job is.
Far from preventing the natural state of things from reasserting itself (war, conflict , hostility) they in fact do everything they can to enable it to reassert itself.
Far from doing everything possible to prevent opposing parties from behaving naturally (conflict) and to persuade them that better outcomes will result from restraint, these modern day popinjays instead act as advocates for their masters, again simply enabling conflict to arise.
A tragic example of the collapse of western diplomacy is the deceit and duplicity of America/Israel's hoodwinking of Iran. Here we have the western diplomatic corps essentially acting as con artists, slavishly doing the bidding of their political masters, engaging in a pre-planned scheme of deceit and lies, aimed at hoodwinking the Iranians into a potential nuclear deal, while knowing that a surprise attack & war was being planned.
An absolute disgrace, which will lead to disaster for the West. But a useful example of the state of western "diplomacy" these days.
Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised, though - again, all these "diplomats" were doing is behaving naturally.
"To be an enemy of the America can be dangerous to be a friend is fatal"
Henry Kissinger(?)
I thought Trump's capitalist bent might change that, looks not to be I guess.
IVERMECTIN/Hydroxy work, Who knew When did the know Who suppressed it.
Accountability Now Now Now
shawn663
Washington does not understand diplomacy! Never has, and possibly never will. Our leaders are like petulant children who scream and kick, like spoiled children in a toy store when they do not get their every demand.
Often the primary aim of diplomacy seems to be starting a war, as in1938-39, when the US and UK persuaded Poland not to accede to Germany's reasonable demands on Danzig by claiming the German army was weak.....