Gee, wonder who wrote this Globe and Mail editorial about Canada’s decision to sever diplomatic relations with Iran?
Particularly this bit:
“Cardinal Richelieu devoted a chapter of his Testament politique to the imperative of continuous negotiation, stating, ‘I may venture to say boldly that to negotiate without ceasing, openly or secretly, in all places, and though no present benefits accrue, nor any prospects of future advantage present itself, is what is absolutely necessary for the good and welfare of States.’”
I mean, who has Richelieu quotes to hand at a moment’s notice? And why not argue for strategic marriages between heads of state, an equally important aspect of 17th century diplomacy?
Curious, we googled, and couldn’t find that translation in readily available editions.
But the same translation, in a very similar introductory sentence, appears in a 2009 article by Mark Lamster about Peter Paul Reubens and Obama. Titled, “Lessons for the President on the Art of Diplomacy” the Huffington Post piece is excerpted from Lamster’s book Master of Shadows – about the famous 17th century Flemish artist turned diplomat. The complete quote from the book (with ellipsis filled in) is this:
“Cardinal Richelieu, the French statesman who was one of Rubens's most persistent adversaries, devoted an entire chapter of his influential Testament Politique to the utility of continuous negotiations. ‘I may venture to say boldly,’ he wrote, ‘that to negotiate without ceasing, openly or secretly, in all places, and that although no present benefit shall accrue from it, nor any prospect of future advantage present itself, is what is absolutely necessary for the good and welfare of States.’"
Here’s the translation - via google books – of the University of Wisconsin (1964) edition:
“….I dare say emphatically that it is absolutely necessary to the well-being of the state to negotiate ceaselessly, either openly or secretly, and in all places, even in those from which no present fruits are reaped and still more in those from which no future prospects as yet seem likely.”
Good to know the Globe doesn’t devote too much time to its rare instances of pompous finger-wagging at the Harper government. After all, they’ll come out and support those same policies again next election.