In spite of the criticism I've received from Mr. Charles, I remain undaunted; the term "American Diplomacy" is an oxymoron.
I don’t see how Secretary of State Hillary Clinton can issue press statements about the status of our negotiations with Iran. There are no negotiations. There is no diplomacy because the United States has no diplomats. The United States has no diplomats because the political process in the United States is seriously askew.
Whenever people select the least qualified politicians to lead the nation, and those individuals in turn appoint the least suited cabinet officers —as a reward for supporting a newly elected president’s campaign, then we have no basis for expecting professional leadership from cabinet officers. Compounding the problem, the Senate, whose cup runneth over with good feelings at the initial stages of a new administration, confirms the appointments of these laggards. This isn't about the Obama administration. This is about a problem involving both political parties for far too many years. While I personally believe the presidency of Barack Obama is a failure, John McCain is presidential material in the same way New Orleans is a bastion of free-market capitalism. At some point, we should wonder how in the world we ever arrived at the point of thinking Bush the Elder, Clinton, Bush the Younger, and Obama represent our best and brightest. If they do, this country is in serious trouble.
But we were talking about American Diplomacy [sic]. Our relations with Iran have been dismal since the 1950s, when the American CIA and British MI-6 conspired to destroy a democratically elected government. After the military coup d'état, James Bond and Matt Helm helped to install Shah Mohammed Ravi Pahlavi as authoritarian monarch. Before then, he served as a constitutional monarch. Under these circumstances, and those involving more recent “regime change” strategies in Iraq and Afghanistan, why should Iran trust anything the Americans have to say? The Iranians know their history, but more to the point, they also know America’s history in the Middle East.
It is impossible for a nation to suffer more than 300,000 casualties in a conflict lasting eight years, realizing that the United States allied itself with Saddam Hussein, and then believe for a second that the United States gives a damn about the Iranian people. It cannot be lost on the Iranians that the United States then turned on its ally, Saddam Hussein. These factors illustrate that the United States has involved itself in conflicts that were not in America’s best interests and certainly in contravention to President Washington’s advice in 1796.
In essence, the United States finds itself in a self-imposed quandary. No sane person wants yet another war in the Middle East. No one wants Israel to launch nuclear missiles at Iran. But Iran is stubborn, America is effeminate, and Israel will not hesitate to defend herself should Iran’s leadership actually begin to believe its own propaganda.
If this is the best we can do, diplomatically, then I think we should withdraw our embassies until we learn something about diplomacy and national interests.