Diplomacy is a profession of patience: pretending to be satisfied and cordial in moments of anger, and reluctantly engaging with people one can barely tolerate dealing with. That is why it can sometimes be an arduous profession—and at other times, the finest measure of relations between states. When those relations deteriorate, so does the conduct of the parties involved. Courtesy gives way to harshness, adversaries begin expelling one another from their countries, and sometimes diplomatic relations are severed altogether.
Over the past month, the United States exercised this “right” at a moment when it seemed to be hovering between a possible settlement and outright hostility. In a moment of anger, it was reportedly said that Secretary of State Marco Rubio had asked the Iranian delegation to leave the country immediately—something that did not happen even at the height of the Cold War.
Expulsion can sometimes involve a particular group or a defined delegation. But when it is comprehensive and immediate, it signals that the crisis is both prolonged and acute. The purported solution came only after a long succession of noes, understandings, concessions, threats, and “final ultimatums.”
The negotiations between Iran and the United States have dragged on beyond what maneuvering and delay can reasonably sustain. For some time now, the dead end has become a truly blocked and increasingly tense road. Tensions reached their peak when the head of American diplomacy himself decided to close the door behind guests whose company he could no longer tolerate.
Iran has sought to downplay the significance of the episode and has denied that it took place. What cannot be denied, however, is that the negotiations between the two sides are without precedent.
Most read
