"And yet the picture that emerges of the Bush-Blair relationship, revealed by that brief snatch of overheard conversation, is a depressing one. Even allowing for the verbal shorthand in which they talk, there is something shallow and simplistic about their world view. Neither gives any indication that they are pursuing a dynamic or creative approach to solving the current crisis, and policy seems to consist of a few half-formed ideas spun out at random. An approach to the hellish bombardment of Beirut that reduces negotiations to a quick image-building trip to the Middle East, and refers laughingly to a key player in Syria, does nothing to suggest a firm grasp of the situation. “I felt like telling Kofi (Annan) to get on the phone to Assad and make something happen,” says Mr Bush. Well yes, we all would. But is this the limit of what the President of the United States feels able to suggest?
Broken syntax and stumbling sentences are revealing, because they give the impression of half-formed policies and poorly worked-out ideas. That is the very opposite of the language of diplomacy, with its well-crafted phrases and its carefully weighted emphases. No one is suggesting that our leaders should suddenly start talking to each other like a Metternich or a Talleyrand. It would, on the other hand, be nice if they made some sense."
I fear that looking for sense is past praying for. What the overheard conversation reveals is that Blair and Bush are stumbling around in the same fog as everyone else.
No comments:
Post a Comment