The Bush administration has had a policy of ostracizing groups and states, such as Iran and Syria, that it deems to be terrorists. As the New York Times notes today, this means that when it needs something from these states, it has no one to talk to.
Although the Bush administration has been extreme in this policy, it's a policy that appears in many different times and different administrations. How many states have "refused to talk to terrorists"? How many states have refused to talk to people on the other side of a conflict? How many states have fudged this issue, choosing at times to take the moral high ground (don't talk to terrorists) and at other times, or at the same time, keeping some kind of communication going because it's the only viable option.
But I propose another way, and I suggest that world leaders institute this policy swiftly and unequivocally. The new policy is: We talk to everybody. This has the advantage of being a simple, clear principle that is easy to explain in a soundbite. It is wonderfuly absolutist. It also takes the moral highground, but it is a rather different highground, and I would argue a higher highground than the "we don't talk to terrorists" policy. It affirms that dialogue is the key to understanding, and that you may have to take risks at some times in order to dialogue. It also makes the opposite policy, "we only talk to some people" seem less and less tenable. We could even go further and say that strong leaders talk to everybody; it is only weak leaders who don't.
This seems to me to be the only policy that can maintain a clear standard, a moral highground, and that is easy to apply and explain. From this day forward, let us never recall an ambassador. From this day forward, let's talk to everybody.
Comments