Author: R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D
President Trump strongly believes in negotiating conflict rather than resorting to the use of force. This is commendable and something I support. His book, “The Art of the Deal” shows the importance of communication and compromise (mostly based on his experience in the business sector), and outlines strategies for successful negotiating to reach a “deal” acceptable to both parties. All, well and good, however, there are a few assumptions that must be met if a negotiated deal will work.
One assumption that must be met is that both parties are rational; by that I mean that they are able to weigh the facts and intelligently determine the likely outcome of an agreement. For instance, Joe Biden, in his apparent mental state while president, would have been incapable of judging and discerning the implications of options and assessing the likely short and long term impact. For example, when asked about the anticipated invasion of Ukraine by Russia his response was to just say “No”. He also implied that a minor invasion would be OK.
The second aspect has to do with both sides having similar moral beliefs and standards. Both China and Iran have agreed to prior negotiated settlements and both of them consistently violated the agreements. Obviously, they had no intention of complying and believed they could hide the truth of their treaty violations. President Reagan once used the expression “Trust but verify”. Fool me once, your fault; fool me twice, my fault. There is a lot of truth in most of the old sayings. Does anyone actually believe that Iran will comply with any agreement that will restrict them from acquiring a nuclear weapon? They have one of the largest supplies of petroleum in the world and want us to believe they are refining uranium so they can build nuclear electrical power plants? Similarly, China has been cheating and stealing our manufacturing secrets for years, as well as denying sending the chemicals to produce fentanyl to the Mexican cartels that have killed more Americans than all the wars in our history. Speaking about moral beliefs, President Trump has repeatedly made reference to the tragedy of human death and casualties in both the Ukraine/Russian and the Israel/Hamas wars. He genuinely cares about people and their suffering. You can see this in how he responds and contacts families of tragedies in this country. Putin could not care less about the number of Russian soldiers that are killed and injured. They are just pawns in a chess game to him; similarly, with the Islamist terrorists controlling Hamas. In fact, their religious beliefs view death in battle against Jews and other infidels as a good thing worthy of extra rewards in the afterlife. People with no moral compass and restraints are not likely to be deterred from using nuclear weapons regardless of the consequences. Assured mutual destruction only works as a deterrent when both sides prefer life over death and destruction.
What is especially troubling about negotiating with evil persons is the unpredictability of their response especially if a conflict begins. Does anyone believe that Hitler would not have used nuclear weapons? Anyone who is at the point of terminating their own life has little reason to show restraint. The evil in these persons will emerge. The escalation of the Ukraine/Russia war with the attacks inside Russia are particularly troubling since Putin’s reaction cannot be determined. President Trump is correct in his fear of an escalation to World War III. The power of one evil person to control the fate of the world is scary indeed. Let’s hope it is not too late for a negotiated settlement.
In the cases of Iran and Hamas, the negotiations should not be allowed to become a delaying strategy that allows either one to achieve their goals. Israel is prepared to destroy the uranium enriching facilities in Iran and that may be, the sooner the better. The complete elimination of Hamas is the only rational alternative, and the hostages should no longer be used as a shield.
Negotiations with evil, must be backed up by the will and ability to enforce any agreement; otherwise, the agreement is useless. We cannot allow the strong desire for a deal to blind us to the reality that deals with evil never work. No deal can be better than a bad deal.