comment_1984
Comment

Comment

The case study of Teheran and Yalta can be ultimately reduced to the question: Should the President of the United States lie? Pericles would have thought so, "for there is justice in the claim that steadfastness in his country's battles should be a cloak to cover a man's other imperfections; since the good action has blotted out the bad, and his merit as a citizen more than outweighed his merit as an individual."

The bottom line of the game of international politics can be formulated through another question: Should a President be guided by his personal code while performing public functions, or does his position grant him a special "ethical" code that gives him dispensation and expiates lying (or some other dishonorable behavior) as long as it is done on behalf of his own perceptions of the interest of his country in the international arena? We could dispense with the question by simply assuming Mark Twain's belief that diplomacy is "a gentle art of lying in state," but what happens if you are the victim? The victims, in this instance are the 10 Central European republics which lost their freedom as a result of World War II: Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Yugoslavia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia. As one perceptive BBC commentator noted in a broadcast last January, immediately after World War II "Commissars took over from the Gauleiters in command of the...

Join now to access the full article and gain access to other exclusive features.

Get Started

Already a member? Sign in here

X