Lately, there's been much ballyhooing about presidential grasper Mike Huckabee's statement about what he'd do about Iran, the upshot of which was, If I may be so bold as to summarize, that he wants to chat with them. There could be more to his position, and I'm sure there is and it's been shaped and molded by the best foreign policy wizard they could afford, much the way I now mold and shape my ever-growing hairdo with gel. But I don't really care. As far as the presidential election is concerned, well, call me when the conventions are over and there are actual candidates in place. Then I'll really start paying attention; right now, it's just a waste of my time to follow positions of people whose policy shaping ambitions will have been firebombed in three months time, ya dig? It's just too much work---and futile, boring, busy work at that.
Here's the thing, though. I may not pay too much attention to the primary/caucus process, but I do listen to what these boneheads (and they're all boneheads---no matter the party to which they've pledged their undying allegiance. It's a requirement when running for president.) have to say about foreign policy. Particularly when it comes to foreign policy regarding people we generally don't get along so well with, like say, Iran. That I do pay attention to. And left or right, there's one thing I'd like to hear from any presidential candidate when it comes to dealing with Iran. It wouldn't make life any easier on them, if by some chance of fate they were elected, but it sure would make me happy and much more ready to accept any sort of formal diplomatic overtures that might happen, should they be elected.
Are you on tenterhooks wondering what this statement could possibly be, my devoted Cake Eater readers? I hope so. I think I've done a good enough job building it up for you.
It's actually pretty simple. I would like these nimrods to say, hey, once Iran formally apologizes for taking over our embassy in 1979, in gross violation of the universally accepted diplomatic playbook, and holding our embassy workers hostage for four hundred and forty four days, whilst sometimes torturing them and scaring the shit out of them by staging fake executions, then we can talk. Until that point in time, forget about it.
I can understand the US has a long and varied history with modern day Iran. We've screwed up there. Big time. The US, on behalf of the UK, in 1953 sponsored a coup that led to some serious repression on the behalf of the dictator we propped up. It was petro-politics gone horribly wrong. This I understand. But this move was also part of the greater Cold War, and for that motive we have no need to apologize. If Iran had become an ally of the Soviets, the Cold War might have taken a turn for the worse. None of this, however, is an excuse for what Iran did to our embassy and our citizens. That they've never apologized for what happened; that they've never provided any sort of compensation for the financial loss of United States property (which is now a museum, dedicated to the glorious hostage taking), or for the pain and suffering our citizens suffered at the hands of their government, shows me that they have no honor. If they do, on the odd chance, want to have a chat with the US about, perhaps having sanctions for their enriched uranium whimsies removed, well, they need to establish some good will. Good will is crucial, otherwise we have no motive to believe a word they say. One way of doing that would be to apologize.
I'm not holding my breath, though. I doubt it will ever happen in my lifetime. But it would be awfully nice if one of these presidential-wannabe boneheads would actually consider that there are things for which other nations need to apologize to us---and this would be at the top of the list.
Posted by Kathy at December 18, 2007 10:45 AM | TrackBack