« Interview: Army officer who studied in India | Main | Niall Ferguson Is Firmly in the Pre-Emption Camp »
January 15, 2006
Diplomatic History is Taking Place Even As We Speak
In addition to the much-publicized diplomatic shuffling between the US and the EU, there are other meetings taking place which happen much less frequently, or at all, and which seem to indicate that momentous events behind the scenes, the contents of which we might only speculate upon, are at hand.
Syria's Assad made a surprise visit to Saudi Arabia last week.
Bush met with former Cabinet officials on Jan 5th.
Kobayashi Maru speculates: Why is Kim Jong-il in China Now?
The answer to all three might be Iran, or it might not. What is scary is that the answer could be Iran. In short, while Iraq was largely diplomatically, economically, militarily and otherwise isolated from the rest of the world before 2003, Iran is only slightly so today. While Iraq's contacts with the west were abundant via the Oil-for-Food scandal, those contacts were still scandalous. Iran is linked to the economies of Russia & China, has relationships with North Korea, Pakistan, even France, Germany, and the UK.
The relationships which Iran possess do not sum up to a coalition. But they are there nonetheless, making the Iran nut even harder to crack, and the price for miscalculation ever higher.
A History of the Modern World
The Austrian government was determined to make an end to the South Slav separatism that was gnawing its empire to pieces. It decided to crush the independence of Serbia, the nucleus of South Slav agitation, though not to annex it, since there were now thought to be too many Slavs within the emprie already. The Austrian government consulted the German, to see how far it might go with the support of its ally. The Germans, issuing their famous "blank check," encouraged the Austrians to be firm. The Austrians, thus reassured, dispatched a drastic ultimatum to Serbia, demanding among other things that Austrian officials be permitted to collaborate in investigating and punishing the perpetrators of the assassination. The Serbs counted on Russian support, even to the point of war, judging that Russia could not again yield in a Balkan crisis, for the third time in six years, without losing its influence in the Balkans altogether. The Russians in turn counted on France; and France, terrified at the possibility of being some day caught alone in a war with Germany, and determined to keep Russia as an ally at any cost, in effect gave a blank check to Russia. The Serbs rejected the critical item in the Austrian ultimatum as an infringement on Serbian sovereignty, and Austria thereupon declared war upon Serbia. Russia prepared to defend Serbia and hence to fight Austria. Expecting that Austria would be joined by Germany, Russia rashly mobilized its army ono the German as well as the Austrian frontier. Since the power which first mobilized had all the advantages of a rapid offensive, the German government demanded an end to the Russian mobilization on its border and, receiving no answer, declared war on Russia on August 1, 1914. Convinced that France would in any case enter the war on the side of Russia, Germany also declared war on France on August 3rd.The German decisions were posited on a reckless hope that Great Britain might not enter the war at all . . . The German plan to crush France quickly was such that it could succeed only by crossing Belgium. When the Belgians protested, the Germans invaded anyway, violating the treaty of 1839 which had guaranteed Belgian neutrality. England declared war on Germany on August 4th . . .
As for Russia and Austria, they were both tottering empires. Especially after 1900, the tsarist regime suffered from endemic revolutionism, and the Hapsburg empire from chronic nationalistic agitation. Authorities in both empires became desperate. Like the Serbs, they had little to lose and were therefore reckless. It was Russia that drew France and hence England into war in 1914, and Austria that drew in Germany. Seen in this light, the tragedy of 1914 is that the most backward or politically bankrupt parts of Europe, through the alliance system, dragged the more advanced parts automatically into ruin.
It is not useful to draw analogies among the power relationships, the rising or falling states, or the alliances of 1914 to those that exist today. We live in a new world. But it is useful to consider the enormous complexity of the world then and now, and to realize that complexity offers both opportunities for the art of the deal to thrive, and for miscalculation to lead to utter ruin.
We are blessed to live in the "interesting times" of the old Chinese proverb . . .
Posted by Chester at January 15, 2006 3:55 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.theadventuresofchester.com/MT/mt-tb.cgi/816
Comments
Yes, I was being optimistic. Confusing is much more accurate.
Posted by: Chester at January 15, 2006 6:39 PM
It appears that all Assad got out of his trip to Saudi Arabia was a recommendation from King Abdullah to cooperate with the UN investigation. We need to remember that Hariri had closer ties to Saudia Arabia than Assad did. Perhaps Assad was looking for a place to run to after he is deposed.
In Iran there is not lonly unrest among the students who are not too stoned to care, but actually something of an armed insurrection by some Sunnit groups. A Sunni town near the Iraqi border has had two different bombings. A larger Sunni group near the point where Pakistand and Afghanistan meet Iran has kidnapped Iranina border guards and is doing the Sunni thing of threatening to cut off their heads if the Iranians do not release some of their group. This latter story is from a story in the Telegraph that is linked on my blog this weekend.
While none of these groups appears poised or capable of toppling the Tehran regime they probably would work with special forces troops in finding targets for US air assets.
North Korea appears to be hurting from our efforts to stop their counterfeit currency scam, saying that it is illogical to continue negotiating giving up their nukes while the US is being so "hostile." Apparently we have also had some success at cutting off their drug trade also.
It would clearly be a beter world with all three of them gone. Korea would probably be the least troublesome after regime change. Syria and Iran are hosting a lot of terrorist who would make as much mischief as possible after regime change, the real questionis for how long after they lose their state sugar daddies.
Posted by: Merv Benson at January 16, 2006 12:30 PM