No honeymoon lasts in foreign policy

19/02/2026

Relations between states are more human than diplomats like to admit. Every so often, politics enters a period of warm rhetoric, glowing praise, and symbolic gestures that suggest distance has vanished and interests have fused. It feels decisive. It rarely is. Foreign policy does not run on sentiment. Differences are not a failure of diplomacy. They are its normal condition. Interests diverge, priorities shift, and domestic pressures pull governments in different directions.

The real measure of a relationship is not whether disagreement appears, but whether it is managed with enough trust, respect, and discipline to keep it from turning into an open crisis. That is why flashy rapprochement is often fragile. It generates headlines, but not necessarily resilience. Durable ties are built more quietly, through institutions, cultural exchange, professional networks, and steady habits of communication. Those layers create ballast.

They reduce misreading when difficult issues return and make it easier to contain friction before it becomes rupture. Ramadan offers a useful metaphor. During this month, etiquette rises, lovely messages multiply, visits resume, and courtesy expands. This is not hypocrisy by definition. It can be social glue.

The danger comes when courtesy becomes camouflage, masking rancor or settling scores in a softer register. States sometimes do the same. The wiser goal is not perfect harmony, but preserved bridges, so difference does not harden into a break.

By Abdulaziz Al-Anjeri