Some Ideas Relating to Five Iranian Detainees

It's in some ways, like a dream. Nothing could be better. Iran captured a affable enough group of British seamen, awarded a few medals for their capture, and then with all appropriate fanfare, pomp, and circumstance, with great ceremony, released the captured seamen to their friends and families.
Coalition and Iranian relations have ascended dramatically. We in the free world have greatly increased esteem for our Iranian brothers, and for Iranian President Ahmadinejad who "did the right thing". What could happen to wreck our temporary assuaging of tension?

Here's a thought. And the thought is in keeping with insights of Washington watchers here in the twenty-first. And Washington does have some influence on Blair, and the Great Britains. Suppose there was no clearly stated promise to release the five Iranians detained by US forces in the northern Iraqi town of Irbil. The US suspects them, we recall, of aiding the Iraqi insurgency. Tehran says they have diplomatic status. US military officials have accused these Iranian suspects of having links to a network supplying funds and weapons to insurgents in Iraq. Iran denies this, saying that its detainees are diplomats.

But suppose there was among international leaders a covert understanding, a subtle agreement, not clearly stated, regarding this release. How terrible, how typical it would be if the agreeing parties on the Allied side , now satisfied with the release of the seamen, dramatically backed out of this clandestine agreement. In that situation, we would be once again on the brink of war, which is a non-diplomatic, militaristic situation that some in authority seem to prefer.