I recently posted a couple of entries about L. L. Zamenhof, the man who created the really marvelous language Esperanto. One of the popular myths about Zamenhof — often repeated by those who know nothing about him except that he invented Esperanto — is that he was a crazed idealist who sincerely believed that the ability to communicate could solve all the world's problems.
Zamenhof, of course, believed no such thing. Even in his home life he knew that communication does not solve all problems (he didn't get along all that well with his somewhat authoritarian father, after all). What he apparently did believe is that, if you have a difference of opinion, communication may not resolve that difference of opinion, but lack of communication definitely will not resolve it. In other words, you've got a better chance of coming out ahead if you're able and willing to talk. (For those familiar with mathematics, this is the fundamental difference between the sufficiency of a condition and the necessity of a condition.)
Fast forward to the year 2006 and President George W. Bush. Oh, I wish I were old enough to say to Bush: "I knew Zamenhof, and, Mister Bush, you are no Zamenhof." Bush is apparently not a great believer in communicating with those with whom he disagrees. The Iraq Study Group has recommended involving Syria and Iran in direct talks with the United States for the purpose of helping to stabilize Iraq and the Middle East. Whether or not you disagree with every piddling point of policy engaged in by those two countries (obviously, few Americans do), it's pretty obvious that both are playing and will play a major role in the Middle East, and that it would be to our advantage to try to convince them to adjust that role somewhat to fit our ideas a little better (and it might also be necessary for us to adjust those ideas a little bit to better fit ourselves to their ideas).
But President Bush apparently does not believe that countries such as Syria and Iran should do anything but kowtow to Western (read: U.S.) demands. Negotiation with them is not feasible. He considers them our enemies — and maybe they are; but has he never heard the old saw Keep your friends close and your enemies closer? It strikes me, as I'm sure it would have struck Zamenhof, that having the little bit of leverage provided by communication (negotiations) is a damned sight better than having the total lack of leverage provided by no communication.
Bring Syria and Iran to the table. Even if the discussion (as a third of a century ago) limits itself to arguing about the shape of the table, that's a step in the right direction. Silence is the wrong direction.