Russia, Again!?
What a triangle of intrigue. From the late 18th century onward Russia and England made their little deals with Iran, one trying to outdo the other. Russia would promise to protect Iran from English designs on its sovereignty, and England would entice Iran to sign agreements to side with it against Russia, and that it would protect Iran from any Russian incursions onto its territory. What has changed in the intervening period? Not an awful lot, it would seem.Here's a deadlock between Iran and England, promising to have the potential to go far beyond what either nation would truly like to envisage. The mind boggles at Iran's dense-minded obligation to oblivion. As though almost universal public censure and the sanctions placed upon its economic well-being by the recalcitrant United Nations weren't enough, Iran feels itself moved to taunt and tempt fate.
Secure in the knowledge, withal, that it is the beloved nation of Allah. They're so mired in apocalyptic fantasies that they seem to believe that no actions on their part however inimical the backlash, will result in their having to pay the piper. The Islamist Iranian regime blusters and threatens and claims its theistic superiority with Allah looking approvingly over the shoulder of its Ayatollas; they are immune to reason, a completely foreign concept of thought.
Britain, as is her wont, exercises the diplomacy of international relations, forgetting in her understandable state of upset that this construct of relations between civilized countries is a lesson in frustration with one such as Iran. It is, after all, a law unto itself. Britain's call for an unconditional return of its seamen may seem rational to it, given the unprecedented hostage-taking event that led to the disappearance of its personnel, but it's a non-issue with Iran which believes itself to have behaved well under the dictates of its particular philosophy.
Which is that they can do whatever it pleases them to do, under any circumstances, to anyone, at any time. Therefore, Britain's outright refusal to 'admit' that the Iranian authorities are correct in their interpretations of the event - and the necessity for them to detain foreign spies, expose them to public shame, rant on about their guilt - is tantamount to their admitting wrong-doing. Warped thinking to rational minds, but completely acceptable to a certain eastern mind-set.
The seamen will not now be readily released. They may have to stand trial on charges of military espionage. It is Britain's fault, Iranian military commander Alireza Afshar contends, for its refusal to accept responsibility for the outcome of its having transgressed national boundaries: "The wrong behaviour of those who live in London caused the suspension," he claimed. Nor does Iran feel Britain should have gone wailing to the UN.
Britain upped the diplomatic pressure by going to the United Nations Security Council to formulate and issue a statement agreeing that the Iranian behaviour is deplorable, that Britain was operating its ships in Iraqi waters under UN mandate. That's when the spoiler enters the scene, and Russia raised her objections, going so far as to reject a call for the 'immediate release' of the 15 British hostages.
The UN capitulated as it generally does, and the watered-down statement read insipidly that the members express 'grave concern' at the capture of the 15 British seamen, and they support the call by UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon for an 'early resolution' to the dispute.
Ho hum.
Labels: World Crises
posted by Pieface @ Friday, March 30, 2007
<< Home