This hostage business is going very badly for Britain. Daniel Hannan, a Member of the European Parliament – or (as those of us who believe in representative government say) European “parliament” – picks up an old theme of mine – that Iran disdains one of the basic qualifications to be recognized as a functioning state. Article 1(d) of the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States:

The capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

How many times does the Islamic Republic have to (a) seize sovereign territory (the US embassy in Teheran); (b) order mob hits on foreign nationals (Salman Rushdie and his publishers); (c) perpetrate acts of state terrorism against citizens of countries with which it has no grievance whatsoever (the Buenos Aires community center bombing)? Its behavior has been consistent for three decades, yet, this time round as last time round, the British government calls in the Iranian ambassador and gives him a stern talking to, as if he were the emissary of Poland or India or any other civilized state.

I respect my friend David Frum’s views expressed elsewhere on this site, but I think he’s wrong: The softly-softly approach will not bring the European Union on side. By according Iran the appearance of a negotiated resolution to this kidnapping, you only reward them and embolden others. To treat an act of war as an unfortunate blip in an otherwise smooth relationship sends a message not just to Iran but around the world.

By the way, the rules of engagement that require Royal Navy vessels in the Iraq theater to patrol hostile waters as if they’re running a pleasure cruise to the Channel Islands is what led to this situation in the first place. When the Argies seized the Falklands without a shot being fired, Lord Carrington resigned as Foreign Secretary because he felt there had been a British humiliation for which his department was responsible. The British Defence Secretary, Des Browne, should do likewise.