Like a twelve-year-old that gets obsessed with a
single idea believing it is the key that unlocks the secrets of the universe,
Matthew Continetti is obsessed with the idea that power––or rather the
projection of it, whether you have it or not––is key to the crafting of an
effective foreign policy.
Looking at the work of Wendy Sherman who
negotiated the nuclear deal with Iran –– from a frame of mind that has yet to
reach the half-backed level –– Matthew Continetti is telling the world he knows
more about negotiating deals, having conducted none himself, than the
gray-haired Wendy Sherman who had a long and stellar career negotiating international
business deals.
Matthew Continetti says this much and more in an
article he wrote under the title: “The Sum of All Tears” and the subtitle: “The
clueless architects of Barack Obama's terrible Iran deal.” It was published on
September 8, 2018 in National Review Online”.
Continetti wants the world to believe that he
acquired a higher level of knowledge just thinking about the subject than
Sherman did in a lifetime of experience doing actual negotiations and making
deals. He wants you to believe that after all these years, the gray-haired lady
remains clueless whereas he assimilated all the clues that the universe has to
offer ... and doing it in the decade that went by from when his mom used to
hold his penis for him showing him how to aim his pee to avoid messing the
bathroom floor.
He says the good lady wrote a book and promoted it
by tweeting about it. He does not say he read the book, but says he read her
tweets about it and did not like what he saw. In fact, he said this: “she
managed to combine basically everything I dislike about Washington,” two of
those things being the tweeter threads and the way that she began to tell her
story.
And so, he took it upon himself to tell her story
as it appears to him, looking at it through the prism that makes up his point
of view. That's what led him to characterize the Wendy Sherman story as being
“embarrassing, both self-pitying and self-congratulatory...” But then, he went
on to add this: “...and proves exactly the opposite lesson that it intends.”
You feel a bit puzzled at this point not knowing who intended what lesson. And
you hope he'll clear up this point before closing his argument.
Matthew Continetti mocks Wendy Sherman for
reporting that she left the hotel only once in 25 days, and considers this to
be her way of expressing self-pity. Well, let me add my voice to hers since I
traveled on ships a number of times, surrounded by luxury such as that on the
French “La Marseillaise” and the Japanese “Akita Maru.” I can report without
self-pity that no matter how luxurious the ship's settings, how sumptuous the
food and how majestic the view of the blue sea extending all around you, it
takes three days or less for a normal human being to start longing for the
moment when he or she will see terra firma again.
Wendy Sherman also told of the moment when she did
the female equivalent of pounding on the table. She began by saying that
“diplomacy can test your patience … Every time one element of the deal changed,
we had to renegotiate within the P5+1 and EU, then go back to the Iranians
again.” And so, when she met with Iran's lead negotiator and his partner to go
over a UN resolution, they wanted instead to reopen a matter that was
previously closed. And that's when she lost her cool. She went on to say: “to my
frustration and fury, my eyes began to well up with tears. I told them their
tactics jeopardized the entire deal … after a long silent moment, they
dismissed their own objection”.
This being the breakthrough that she was hoping
for, Wendy Sherman explained what this moment meant to her. And Matthew
Continetti could not help but comment on that.
Here is what she said: “Women are told it's not
socially acceptable to get angry … it's a sign of weakness to let people see
you cry … [But] when you bring values like authenticity, persistence and
commitment to the negotiating table, you are enormously powerful”.
And here is his commentary: “Confidence and
decorum are traits of strong leaders. More likely: the Iranians were taken
aback at this off-the-wall display. What is the lesson? To have a fit when
negotiations reach an impasse? Power is not a function of values like
authenticity, persistence, and commitment. It is a function of resources and
fighting spirit”.
So this is the lesson, he said earlier, was intended.
She missed it, he says, by being authentic, persistent and committed instead of
projecting America’s resources and fighting spirit.
It shows that Matthew Continetti wasn’t born yet
when America projected resources and fighting spirit, yet was defeated in
Vietnam by a ragtag army of bare-feet Vietcong who were authentic, persistent
and committed.
It also shows that Matthew Continetti has not yet
matured at a time when America is projecting resources and fighting spirit, yet
is being held at bay by a ragtag army of bare-feet Taliban who are authentic,
persistent and committed.