We moved into sessions and I walked into with great stride in hopes that my performance as a diplomat would be tested and proved. I was now going to portray beliefs that I mostly work against. For pins that I sport on my bags that state “Pro-Palestine, Pro-Israel, Pro-People” something some argue the US believes and what most Americans know is not the case in Iraq is on another pocket, “End War, Bring Peace.”
Now I was speaking against dialogue with Palestinians and against signing on troop withdrawal in Iraq. Foolish Nadia, what I thought would be new and exciting, now was putting a horrible damper on my heart. My words were coming out and my head felt heavy all I kept thinking in my mind was that I spoke on, I didn’t believe. That was what helped me make sense out of this trip though. This was helping me realize that my life would never be easy and if I wanted to work with the US State Department or around the world for bettering the Middle East, I needed to start being open to compromising theories, clearly theorizing both sides of the conflict and analyze what changes meant to those who would eventually receive it. Things were not always as simple as our rationality makes it, especially when reality hits.
I was grateful for viewpoints from the Japanese proposals of peaceful dialogue, Russia’s strategic place on Middle East investment, and the refusal of war by the Germans and the voiced anger at the handling of Iraq by France.
In my speech, after hearing many declarations of anti-Iraqi war sentiment, I told my counterparts “Iraq is a war that won support from the people in the country, they are now voting and to think three-fourths of us in this room, of the most powerful leaders in the world, did not support or initiate it, saddens me.”
The response from the French delegation put both my worlds into perspective. Marina told me the war was wrong, the outcome was good, the road that is being taken now is towards more wrongs. The Italian minister, Enrico continued “now, we should play smarter roles, understand the people on the battle ground and this war will end, yes?”
Yes. I agree.
What I actually said was something else. “No I don’t agree, because we do understand the cultures on the ground, they must be more receptive to us, we cannot control their minds and it will take time to work with these people, which is why we will be there until no specific deadline.”
Shortly thereafter, Enrico, the Italian Foreign Minister angrily came to me during dinner and said “I don’t know if you want to be a diplomat or a politician but all I know, is that you would be a great actress.”
I realized, this worked against everything I wanted to achieve and now it was time to change my approach without letting go of the current Administrations handlings. I realized at that moment, the point of this conference was to think about the future, not about the theories of a government whose reign would be over in two years. The real test was figuring out solutions our government would most likely consider in two years in what will be known to our generation as the most pressing transitional period.