This Iran story is bizarre. But it highlights some interesting aspects of international relations: the difficulty of managing domestic politics while rallying international support for complex diplomatic efforts.The Winner? Mayhem.
Americans don't like chaos. Between the boss, the commute, the kids, the bills and remembering to DVR The Jersey Shore, life can be pretty tough. But 28% of Americans still dutifully take their daily multivitamin of nightly news to stay informed.
Think of like Dads everywhere wanting to beinformed how school is going at daughter's first semester of college. Or when consumers want to be informed how their tasty McDonald's Sausage is made.
This story on Iran, a drug cartel, a moron, and an assassination plot is weird. It's hard to understand. It's chaotic. This means that Americans fall back into our traditional roles for understanding tough international problems. You see it when you turn on NBC and Brian Williams informs you of the situation. All the classic characters make an appearance: a malevolent regime, a "worried" American public, a President boldly taking decisive action. Problem Solved. Turn on Jeopardy.
The problem is this: its really hard to understand how decisions are made even in our own government, much less a foreign government, much less a diffuse and semi-official shadowy international covert action network. So, understanding what is official policy, a government decision, or a rogue action is palm reading. Not science, but occasionally helpful.
Did the Iranian regime really get together, debate, decide, plan, resource and then execute a mission to assassinate the Saudi representative to the US? Probably not. Are US foreign relations staff still trained and organized to understand States and then make agreements with States? Most are still trained and organized in this way.
Unfortunately for the President, States are wildly varied in organization, hierarchy, and coherence. It's really hard to know if states are going to do what they say they are going to do. It's even harder if you're not talking to them. It's even harder if you have a history of espionage and regime change.
Concepts like State Craft, Regime, ShakeWeight are comforting but are really sort of fairy tales. The good old days when States perceived their self interest, made rational decisions and enforced agreements, probably never existed in the first place.
So how do we understand the world and then make decisions? Whats emerging here is a more expansive understanding of the organizations and people out there in the world. As always, the basics apply: Neorealism, Self Interest, Walt's take on Alliances, Nye's Soft Power approach. All useful lenses. They're not wrong. But only pieces of the puzzle.
It's hard to know what's happening, decide what should be done, and then do that. So before you cry "lies!" at the overworked national security staff at the White House, just take a sec and think. It's mayhem out there.
Think of like Dads everywhere wanting to beinformed how school is going at daughter's first semester of college. Or when consumers want to be informed how their tasty McDonald's Sausage is made.
This story on Iran, a drug cartel, a moron, and an assassination plot is weird. It's hard to understand. It's chaotic. This means that Americans fall back into our traditional roles for understanding tough international problems. You see it when you turn on NBC and Brian Williams informs you of the situation. All the classic characters make an appearance: a malevolent regime, a "worried" American public, a President boldly taking decisive action. Problem Solved. Turn on Jeopardy.
The problem is this: its really hard to understand how decisions are made even in our own government, much less a foreign government, much less a diffuse and semi-official shadowy international covert action network. So, understanding what is official policy, a government decision, or a rogue action is palm reading. Not science, but occasionally helpful.
Did the Iranian regime really get together, debate, decide, plan, resource and then execute a mission to assassinate the Saudi representative to the US? Probably not. Are US foreign relations staff still trained and organized to understand States and then make agreements with States? Most are still trained and organized in this way.
Unfortunately for the President, States are wildly varied in organization, hierarchy, and coherence. It's really hard to know if states are going to do what they say they are going to do. It's even harder if you're not talking to them. It's even harder if you have a history of espionage and regime change.
Concepts like State Craft, Regime, ShakeWeight are comforting but are really sort of fairy tales. The good old days when States perceived their self interest, made rational decisions and enforced agreements, probably never existed in the first place.
So how do we understand the world and then make decisions? Whats emerging here is a more expansive understanding of the organizations and people out there in the world. As always, the basics apply: Neorealism, Self Interest, Walt's take on Alliances, Nye's Soft Power approach. All useful lenses. They're not wrong. But only pieces of the puzzle.
It's hard to know what's happening, decide what should be done, and then do that. So before you cry "lies!" at the overworked national security staff at the White House, just take a sec and think. It's mayhem out there.
"Dude! It's cool! We're all dumb at most stuff. Just, some of us pretend not to be."
0 comments:
Post a Comment