Sir Richard Dalton analyses the Iranian sailor-kidnapping fiasco.
It is a human instinct to construct a narrative to try and make sense of events. The Iranians were planning to get x and have achieved y. The Brits knew what was going to happen all along and played a good diplomatic game.
9/11 Conspiracy types took about two minutes to proclaim that it was all a set-up by the Americans to justify bombing Tehran*.
But as with so many things, the truth is rather more prosaic. It was just another sorry series of stupid, make-it-up-as-you-go-along cock-ups. Plus a healthy dash of pathetic personal hubris on the part of Ahmadinejad.
(*Some of the sailors themselves clearly forgot to read this script. The Stockholmish toadying to their captors from one man in particular was bizarre and difficult to watch.)
10 comments:
Dalton's piece reads right out of 1935, not forgetting at the end to blame the Jooos.
Disgusting.
Well yes, the last few paras are nonsense. But he's right that nobody knew what they were doing in this whole affair.
Are you up very early or very late, Harry?
Those complaining from the political Right, both here and in America, about a weak response were shown to be opportunistic and out of touch. Whether it was John Bolton, the former American ambassador to the UN, complaining about European resolve in general towards Iran, or editorialists regretting that there were no Palmerstons to defend the rights of Britons, such critics never set out a credible causal link between their preferred tactics and how to get Iran to release the captives.
There was no credible link because there are more things at stake than just the release of the captives. When someone breaks into your home and steals your stuff, is the only focus of law enforcement to get your stuff returned?
The number one responsibility of the British government in responding to the capture of its sailors should be to extract a high enough price from the Iranian regime to dissuade them from ever trying to kidnap British sailors again. You can't make the safety of the hostages your overriding concern. Britain has lost much prestige in this episode, and prestige is what helps nations protect their citizens and ther soldiers from calculating enemies. These 13 are safe for now, but British soldiers and sailors are now fair game for any other radical group or governments wanting to score points off of them.
Duck stole my thunder.
When Dalton says [S]uch critics never set out a credible causal link between their preferred tactics and how to get Iran to release the captives he shows that he entirely misses the critic's point. As important as it was to get the 15 service people home safe, it is more important to convince Iran that it will pay a price for being an international criminal.
That post was composed around 10 p.m., sorta late for me as I rise with the chickens.
The point should not be restricted so narrowly as Iran-UK or just 15 sailors.
Iran has been at war with civilization since 1979. Iran is so weak that civilization has not deigned to notice. Relative weakness can change over time.
Eventually, we'll notice. It would be a mercy, especially for Iranians, if it happens sooner rather than later.
So materialism was the cause of the most destructive wars in history, and now materialism is to blame for the wimpiest response to a warlike provocation in recent memory? Flexible stuff, that materialism.
I'm with Peter. It went ok - problem solved. You hawks are so very, very hawkish.
Peter's not with you. His point is that you Brits became so wimpy because you stopped reading your Bible.
Oh yes - Peter's just saying it in a more roundabout way.
We're already in Iraq and Afghanistan. Cannons at dawn are only one form of international aggression. Hornblower knew that well enough.
Post a Comment