I like the idea of diplomacy and negotiations. What I find amusing is that the US doesn't use diplomacy and negotiations, and that is the problem. Mr Crooke and others all talk about Trump's scatter shot truths, as if this is in fact the only negotiation going on. But actually I don't see negotiation from any side in these conflicts.
Yes, Trump's dance is infuriating to me because I see nothing can be gained by this sort of activity, but when I look at the opposite side of the negotiations, I say, so what else can be done? You can't exactly negotiate with anyone that says this is my position, and you can do what we say or we will do worse. Hmmm, THAT is diplomacy?
Both Russia and Iran have "NON-negotiable positions," and for the most part, those that ARE negotiable have little to do with what the other side wants. Same with Ukraine, and to a lesser extent, and yes, that IS my position, the US. There has been a lot of movement towards what Iran wants, as an example, and Iran has not moved a bit in its demand. Yes, YOU can call this diplomacy and negotiations, but I have to question your viewpoint. The "memorandum of understanding" is NOT a treaty, it is a list of things to negotiate on. Well, it should be, but there was not a single point in that memorandum that appeared to be negotiated. It was all "Get on your knees and kiss my feet."
It is NOT just the US that appears incapable of negotiating. The opposite side, be it Russia or Iran, show no flexibility either. Lip service is all I see from that side.

Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.