Where do you get the idea that “classical diplomacy” reduces to “balance of power.” (You say Charles Freeman)

While the current US approach to Iran is quite flawed, it’s hardly the fount of wisdom to counsel we go back to what was indeed the cardinal flaw in US approaches to Iran since the Nixon/Kissinger years — e.g., “balance of power” thinking. (e.g., either having the Shah as our “balancer” ally against Saddam, or then having Saddam balance out Iran, or the Clinton approach of somehow having the GCC balance out Iran and Iraq….

Diplomacy YES — for a change. But “balance of power?” Soooooo 19th century. :-}

I apologise. It wasn’t my intention to make you feel that I was connecting your name to statements you haven’t made or agree with. The “@” basically means that the comment is directed “at” someone, but I understand your concern.

“U.S. is foregoing so many advantages that would otherwise accrue to itself.”

(I assume you mean eg working with Iran)

“Advantages” for the US is when it can advance itself on behalf of others. Such “advantages” are not compatible with the interests of others (ie sane, intelligent people). The reason the US is “foregoing” all “opportunities” is simply because nobody wants to work with the US on such terms. Remember that the US had and has good relationship with regimes that are corrupt and commit despicable crimes, Saddam and Saudi Arabia are two examples that comes to mind. If you want you could put Israel here and have an explanation to why the US easily can work with them. The policy that Israel is enforcing is hurting what for normal people would be be their long term interests ie living peacefully with their neighbours, while it is advancing US interests in the region.

I’m keeping it short, there is of course a lot to be said on the matter.

It would not surprise me in the least if there were intervention in the markets, not just by the Saudis, but by Western governments, kind of a TARP for oil markets.

Two things.

There Iranian oil bourse should perhaps be taken into consideration?

“Saudi Arabia may have found a way to defeat the liberalized trading system for oil and to maintain high prices in periods of excess supply,”

You assume that this is a decision that Saudi Arabia can take. Sorry but they (Arabs) and especially Saudis are politically pathetic. They have no real say in important matters (perhaps only how they may kill each other). I hardly believe that if the US didn’t want higher price than SA wouldn’t have found any “loopholes”. This brings us to my second point. The high prices if I am not mistaken is hitting poor nations (and people, eg in US) foremost. Considering all, wouldn’t a higher oil price hurt the developing economies more than the US & thugs?