You are here

Speculation is not the name of diplomacy

Jul 21,2019 - Last updated at Jul 21,2019

The latest release of leaked diplomatic cables in the British press about the explanation of the former British Ambassador to the US Kim Darroch, for President Donald Trump's decision to pull out from the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, suggests that Trump went ahead with this unnerving stance to spite former president Barack Obama who was the main architect of the deal.

The British ambassador described Trump’s move as an "act of diplomatic vandalism" whatever that means. Granted that there is not much love lost between Trump and Obama but to suggest that Trump went ahead with his decision to unilaterally withdraw from the 2015 accord just to annoy Obama is farfetched, to say the least, especially when there are more plausible reasons to explain Trumps' aggressive stance on Iran. 

Trump can be frivolous but he could not be so shallow as to end a far-reaching accord with Iran for personal reasons. 

The ambassador's view and interpretation of Trump's inner reasons for cancelling the "deal" with Iran are simply his, and they may not be vindicated. The ambassador's view could be a subjective interpretation of Trump's move not necessarily borne out of fact. To even attempt to explain the judgements of others on subjective grounds could be irresponsible and reckless، and should be avoided.  

Diplomats, especially ambassadors, are usually discrete in passing judgement about the personal character and integrity of the head of the state where they are appointed.  

That said, it is a well-known fact that Israel has put Iran on the top of its list of enemies and described it as a mortal enemy which poses an existential threat.  

It would make more sense to conclude that Trump did what he did to serve and promote Israel's own hostile agenda for Iran than to speculate on other grounds.

President Trump cannot be so frivolous as to adopt a stance on Iran with far-reaching consequences on purely emotional grounds based on a "hatred" for his predecessor at the White House. 

The US president has aligned himself and his policies with Israel, in general, and with its incumbent Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in particular, so closely from day one. It is as if there is a "holy alliance" between the two leaders, written or otherwise, which drives Trump more than anything else. 

Against this backdrop it is odd that the distinguished and widely acclaimed British ambassador did not see the wider picture and ignored altogether the Israeli link to Trump’s decision to unilaterally quit the 2015 deal with Iran. Speculation is not the name of diplomacy and Sir Darroch may have done exactly that in this instance. 

up
58 users have voted.

Add new comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
2 + 15 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.

Newsletter

Get top stories and blog posts emailed to you each day.