Diplomacy, Fighting/Confrontation, Or Both?

By Richard Brody

Historically, most nations have prioritized diplomacy, and diplomatic efforts, rather than seeking confrontations, etc! While a diplomat, might, or might not, produce effective results, doesn't it make sense, to prioritize, peaceful solutions, prior to confronting others, and risking wars? Few would argue, we are undergoing dangerous times, with apparent threats coming, from terrorists, foreign/ international threats, domestic infighting, as well as a new type of terrorism, stemming from cyberspace (hacking, intrusions, thefts, etc). Every leader, of every nation, must determine, which path, to follow, and, hopefully, recognize, the positives, negatives, and possibilities, as well as potential ramifications, of every action, etc. Leaders must decide, whether to prioritize diplomacy, fighting/ confrontation, or some combination, of both!

1. Diplomacy: President Donald Trump, seems to be de - emphasizing diplomatic solutions and/ or pursuits, while often, articulating, a far more confrontational message! The United States Department of State, which traditionally, focuses on diplomatic solutions, etc, has been significantly weakened, with our diplomatic corps, reduced to, a somewhat, bare - bones level, in terms of personnel, and professionally trained, experienced, diplomats. Whether it is a matter of style, or substance, Mr. Trump, has relied more on his gut instincts, and less on experienced individuals. He believes, apparently, being more confrontation, and/ or adversarial, will garner greater results! While he may be right or wrong (only time will tell), it may be a far riskier approach, because, if we've learned anything from history, wars rarely happen, while nations are having discussions. With the weapons of war, which exist today, can we risk, daring others?

2. Fighting/ confrontation: America's history is filled with numerous wars and "police actions." Times were different, during most of these confrontations, because the types of weapons, were different. Beginning with the end of World War 2, when President Harry Truman, dropped the bomb, on Hiroshima, Japan, the world began an era, when these weapons, of mass destruction, potentially, risk its existence! In recent times, we've witnessed both, large - scale, as well as individual acts of terrorism, including automatic weapons, and use of toxic gases (in Syria, for example), and President Trump, appears to believe, the best approach, is bravado, and a showing of strength, rather than diplomatic solutions. He articulates a message, stating this nation has been hurt by dumb wars, and bad agreements, yet faces potential, undesirable ramifications, if his words become the opening salvo, in our latest wars!

3. Combination: Wouldn't it make sense, to combine, both of the previous, two, approaches? By beginning, with directed, negotiations, and seeking diplomatic solutions, first, while making it clear, we are ready, to back our positions, with actions, if necessary, wouldn't that be a safer approach?

Let's hope, this world can become a better one, with less hatred, and bigotry, etc! Perhaps, if we seek a meeting of the minds, rather than pursuing the, my way, or the highway, approach, we'll be on our way!

Richard has owned businesses, been a COO, CEO, Director of Development, consultant, professionally run events, consulted to thousands, conducted personal development seminars, and worked on political campaigns, for 4 decades. Rich has written three books and thousands of articles. Website: http://plan2lead.net and LIKE the Facebook page for common sense politics: http://facebook.com/commonsense4all