Is Post 9/11 Diplomacy Dead?

President Chirac's announcement of Nuclear retaliation if France were to be targeted with terrorist attacks should bring into question the efficacy of diplomacy in the post 9/11 world. France has evidently come to the (correct) realization that the legacy of the Treaty of Westphalia...diplomacy, is no longer a useful tool in Nation State interactions involving non-Western powers. Diplomatic negotiations provide only limited results even between subscribing Western Nations when dealing with each other. The leadup to the Iraq invasion will stand in history as a failure of Western diplomatic methods between European partners no matter whose side you were on. Diplomatic efforts fair much worse in Middle Eastern countries, where it is generally ineffective.

The current Iranian nuke scare is the foremost example. Middle Eastern countries; with their history of caliphates, kingdoms and tribal warring, still seem incapable of grasping the rudimentary concepts of diplomacy that have been the gold standard of Western Nations for centuries. Sure it did not always work amongst us, but the talks continued until the spears or bombs flew..and often for some time afterwards. During this process, there was at least a chance that the two sides might see eye to eye eventually. Diplomatic negotiations are successful if, and only if, one side can convince the other of the strength or correctness of it's argument. Compromises, where possible, were par for the course. But the process is balanced on the tenet that all sides were listening to each other, and capable of making rational decisions based on correct information. Currently, Western powers cannot convince Iran of why it is impossible for them to be a nuclear state. Our argument is valid, and it's conclusion universally accepted, but Iran is not listening. Viable compromises have been offered, plans laid out and solutions proposed...to no avail. Iran seems bent on ushering in the blood relative of diplomacy, armed conflict, for the sake of pride alone. It is a remnant of their Ancient culture, peculiar in this day and age to Middle Eastern countries and those still floundering in the Communist manifesto. It must be remembered that rationality prevailed in preventing a nuclear exchange between the United States and The Soviet Union. This was possible because Russia's history was one of diplomatic participation up to the Communist revolution. The idea was revived with difficulty...but it eventually carried the day. I fear this change impossible in Iran, and elsewhere in the Middle East. Sadly, the outcome cannot be good for anyone.

Chirac has now apparently "given up" on the process of diplomacy with Middle Eastern states. In a certain sense, he has actually revived (as has Bush) the long lost aspect of diplomacy which holds Nation States responsible for actions of their citizens. His announcement is an attempt to return to this precept, and dispense with the proven useless act of Western style diplomacy in relation to such countries.
Diplomacy will now be carried out in the form of a threat...a very big one. Choose to ignore it at your own peril, because there will not be discussions if the line is crossed. It is a long overdue sign of frustration in attempting to negotiate with those who will not listen.