This is the last edited chapter of the Tom Smith comment of Mikhail Kryzhanovsky’s book-manual of The Professional.
I am unaware if there are other chapters to The Professional and I am not looking for them. I have mentioned that the stories attributed to a Mikhail Kryzhanovsky are too fantastic to believe; nonetheless the information is lucid so I have posted them.
Here are links to the other four chapters of The Professional:
Chapter 5. Foreign Policy
A king has to do three jobs: persuade the rich to help the poor; persuade the best woman to marry him; and persuade other kings to fight each other instead of fighting him. OK. Foreign policy is a set of political goals that seeks to outline how USA will interact with other countries; it’s designed to help protect our national interests, national security, ideological goals, and economic growth. Successful foreign policy needs electoral and financial support. This comes naturally when you demonstrate the permanent presence of external threats like the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) or international terrorism, to keep the nation alert and in line.
Foreign policy serves to help you with domestic problems which often “push” you to make hard international decisions. It’s not about democracy in Iran or Iraq - it’s about your reelection.
Presidential Foreign Policy Doctrines Monroe Doctrine: European powers must keep their hands off the Western Hemisphere.
Theodore Roosevelt Doctrine: The United States will police chronic wrongdoing or impotence.
Truman Doctrine: To support free people resisting subjugation from internal or outside groups.
Eisenhower Doctrine: To intervene in the Middle East against Communist attacks.
Nixon Doctrine: To help allies while fostering their reduced reliance on troops. Secretary of State William P. Rogers signs the Peace Agreement ending the Vietnam War. 1973.
Carter Doctrine: To keep the Persian Gulf free of foreign control. [SlantRight Editor: The Carter Doctrine is the Carter failure.]
Reagan Doctrine: To support anti-Communist insurgencies anywhere. The president loves war, not peace, because:
a) Successful military engagement enhances presidential popularity. All five Presidents who have run for re-election during a war have won.
b) A quick war improves the electoral fortunes of the president’s political party.
c) War is good business, at least if you win, and at least if it does not drag on too long. It stimulates demand for a variety of manufactured goods and services (even if they are all destined to go down the drain) and is a powerful stimulus to all fields of scientific endeavor.
d) War provides opportunities to direct lucrative contracts to companies and individuals who helped get the President elected, or who can help in the future; and to the constituents of select Senators and Congressmen for the same reasons.
e) War usually pleases the Joint Chiefs (and their full support is important politically).
f) War keeps down the unemployment figures.
g) War is just one detail in a vast ongoing game of international strategy for domination; it is as much a financial operation as anything else.
h) War unifies the country, and keeps the public’s attention away from issues that might be controversial.
Foreign policy decision making involves:
- assessment of the international and domestic political environment
- goal setting. We have multiple foreign policy goals, and we must determine which goal is affected by the international and domestic political environment
- determination of policy options
- decision making action
- implementation of chosen policy option
You have to decide if you want to design and execute foreign policy all by yourself, even not telling Secretary of State about your confidential talks, negotiations or special operations.
There’s one more strong point — you also have considerable advantages over Congress in foreign policy making — you know why?
First, as head of foreign policy bureaucracy, the diplomatic corps, the intelligence agencies and the military, you control information that is vital to the foreign policy making.
Second, you, unlike Congress, can work with speed and secrecy and this is essential if you have to handle international crisis which threatens national security.
Third, since it is your responsibility to communicate with foreign governments through treaty negotiations and diplomatic channels, you can most easily formulate policy that is consistent with negotiating positions and official statements.
Fourth, as the executor of foreign policy, Commander in Chief of the armed forces and appointer of diplomatic personnel, you are in the best position to judge the capacity of the government to carry out a given foreign policy initiative.
Fifth, you are elected by a national constituency and you can focus on international problems that affect the entire nation.
Finally, get highly professional staff, because international relations involve a diverse range of issues, from globalization to global warming, nuclear proliferation, nationalism, terrorism, organized crime, human security, and human rights.
1. International treaties have to be negotiated by diplomats prior to endorsement by presidents.
2. The information gathered by spies plays an increasingly role in diplomacy (arms-control treaties would be impossible without the power of reconnaissance satellites and agents to monitor compliance).
3. If you start war, it doesn’t mean you failed diplomacy, it means military decision is much more profitable.
4. Make it clear to foreign leaders right away whether you are or you are not going to follow the previous President’s foreign policy (after consultations with big business). If you are not going to follow it, design a doctrine of your own (it’s a strategy that is the recognized approach or policy of the US government.
5. National security is your top priority and is the “king’s job” because actually you have no domestic political obstacles to your foreign policy (if it’s a question of war), so you are a chief decision maker there. (The CIA Director has to be excluded from this process — you don’t need him. Besides, the CIA even today, no matter how hard I tried to educate the Agency, remains the worst of the worst and is not to be reformed — it has to be abolished. We have to transfer political intelligence functions to Pentagon. National security is designed to protect the United States and the vital interests (investments) of big business and to promote American values in a world of rivals, and the CIA, through all 60 years of its history, has proved to be absolutely unsuitable for the job).
6. Any country has to be involved in the sphere of our strategic interests if it has a strategic geographic position, significant sources of raw materials, a well-developed transportation system, or could be used as a military base. The strategic policy of any country rotates around the USA and if not — that means a certain President is waiting for greater incentives to come on board. Against target countries, don’t hesitate to use the strategies of pre-emptive war, post-war (post-crisis) reconstruction, and nation building (which means erasing national identity and supplanting it by liberal values). With China’s growth and Russia’s rebirth, the Cold War is back with a vengeance, so we are back to secret deals based on spheres of influence — but that’s a temporary strategy.
7. You can’t always do what you want without help - you are dependent on other world leaders, Congressional positions and international public opinion. Ask the Senate to help you sometimes - believe me, they’ll be happy and proud to do so.
8. Create super-profitable conditions for big business by political penetration worldwide. Big money men start investing abroad when they find a safe environment — law and order. The more they invest the more political power they get (international corporations is the most important element of international system; the other two are governments and non-governmental organizations).
9. Use big investors to ruin other national economies and governments by withdrawing finances when the economic situation is worsening. As soon as the country opens its financial markets, it increases its dependence on global economic processes that it cannot control; and a financial crisis can easily be staged. Conversely, other countries’ access to the US markets is a powerful economic and political tool.
10. Make the US markets the most attractive for investors by provoking unstable situations in other countries and regions.
11. Send troops or work through military intelligence (not the CIA) to wherever you perceive a threat to the US investments.
12. Use pressure everywhere — strategic nuclear missiles are still the most powerful blackmail tool. Remember, if you are dealing with Russia or China, they will look not only for agreement, but for advantages.
13. Use “personal diplomacy” — phone calls to foreign leaders (every planned phone call has to go through the National Security Adviser and be well prepared, like a serious negotiation). Most important are phone calls to our allies — NATO members. Don’t forget to wish happy birthday to the leaders in person!
14. Use “informal diplomacy” – recruit politicians in other nations who might be able to give informal access to a country’s leadership. In some situations, such as between USA and China, diplomacy is done through semi-formal channels using interlocutors such as academic members or think-tanks. This occurs in situations when presidents wish to express intentions or to suggest methods of resolving a diplomatic situation, but do not wish to express a formal position.
15. Don’t hesitate to use summits as a tool, because: -if you meet a foreign leader in person, you can reduce tensions and clarify national interests.
-personal relationship may lead to improved relations between nations.
-summits allow you to focus national attention on specific issues.
-presidents engaging in personal diplomacy are much more capable than career diplomatic bureaucrats of understanding the domestic policy consequences of diplomatic actions.
-summit negotiations can yield quick results, since discussions are between leaders with the power of decision rather than between representatives who must receive instructions, make reports and rely new proposals.
-diplomatic impasses may be overcome at summits by shifts in policy that only top leaders are empowered to make.
-if presidents desire an international forum for their diplomatic policies, a summit meeting can provide one.
-successful summits can enhance the image of the President and the United States
16. If you’re ready to fight for national interests, forget about human rights — you can always blame infractions on the other side.
17. Isolation is the greatest enemy to information.
18. There’s no sense in applying sanctions if big business isn’t interested.
19. Economic and hence, political progress for any country affects the USA through economic competition that threatens the market and jobs.
20. Any initiative is risky if it’s about unstable region, but you lose popularity fast if you are perceived as indecisive or weak in foreign policy.
21. Any trip abroad has to convey a strong message.
22. Direct military intrusion indicates weakness in your foreign policy. If it’s inescapable, involve as many allies as you can.
23. Don’t touch our military bases abroad!
24. Big debts open markets. No matter what, open national markets world-wide for American big business and remember — the markets, not Presidents, rule the world.
25. Tie your allies to international economic projects and make them pay most of the expenses.
26. Never talk about money in public — talk about democracy, human rights, liberal values and disarmament — people like it.
27. Move forward — transform Americans’ national and patriotic feelings into nationalistic ones (follow the French model) to get total support of your policy (see “Mind Control”).
28. Don’t pay too much attention to the CIA — all they have to do is to support you with appropriate information to justify your strategic political decisions - and nothing else.
29. Ignore the UN — Secretary General has no real power, but you can take advantage of such a thing as the UN peace-keeping if it corresponds with your interests
- the US economic costs could be minimized. Besides, UN peacekeeping can promote a spirit of international accountability in solving a certain regional problem. Don’t forget to explain your strategy to the Congress
- they don’t like the UN either. On the other hand, you have to manage an international crisis, if it threatens our national interests (start with strategic planning, check national security system for the adequate response, use propaganda to get domestic and international support, consult with big business and allies, start crisis negotiations if possible, use diplomacy (see below) and force or threat of force).
30. To reach global leadership you must have enough resources, national support and a well-calculated strategy (see also “Strategic planning”).
As you already know, the US budget is financed by foreign lending. When the dollar goes down in foreign exchange markets, it’s supported by foreign central banks and you’re OK as long as Japan, Saudi Arabia and Germany have an interest in propping up the American economy and do not raise the price for financing America’s debt.
The worst situation would be to lose support both at home and abroad. World Domination Securing the top position requires:
- economic domination - military power — pre-emptive war or blackmail by war (seeking domination requires an inevitable increase in the military budget)
- a cultural and media invasion
- special operations to influence or neutralize leaders with negative attitude
To keep America on top, we would have to prevent cooperation and coalitions between: China, Africa, Shi’ia and Sunni Muslims, Russia, Germany, France, Venezuela and Cuba.
Their trade agreements and alliances will change the geopolitical situation. The US seems to have been responding to events rather than anticipating them, which means that until now it has had no global international plan. Watch where the “vectors of force” are directed and you’ll break their strategic plans.
Don’t listen to experts
- crude oil world resources will be finished by the middle of the century. Get total control over the world oil market by force (Iraq and Iran) and take care of the weapons market knock out Russia and restrain China. Restrict their military research activity.
- Chinese nuclear and other WMD had better be our top priority in the next 20 years.
In most important world regions keep the balance by supporting the country which follows the leader:
In Europe — support Britain to balance Germany. You rule Europe if you rule the Persian Gulf. You rule the world if you rule Europe, and that’s why you have to keep NATO by all means to block the military independence of Europe (Germany). And watch Russia — it’s still highly militarized and holds Europe a hostage.
In East Asia - support Japan, Russia and Taiwan to balance China.
In South Asia support Pakistan to balance India.
In Latin America — support Argentina to balance Brazil.
Our country is considered to be a superpower, though European Union, China, Russia and India have good potential of achieving the same status. They all have large populations, growing military strength, economic potential and influence in international affairs. We are a superpower, but we have to admit that it does not mean that the world is unipolar – at present it’s a unipolar system with one superpower and several rivals, major powers.
Foreign Policy Top Secret— the “Democracy Trick”
It’s all about natural resources and raw materials. General scheme: choose the target country start war or “push” opposition to launch a coup bring in “liberal values” help to move oil and gas into private hands help to create an “open economy” and “open market” become the only (the biggest) customer and stockholder.
Diplomacy "Golden" rules
1. Use secret visits (send the National Security Adviser) if the international problem is complex and important — in this way you don’t depend on media and public opinion. Afterwards you can talk, if it was a success.
2. If presidents like to drink with each other, they are ready to deal with each other.
3. Avoid negotiating on major issues at the end of the day, when your energy is low.
4. Negotiate smart, watch your initiatives. The more you tell about your position, the less your partner will tell you about himself and the higher price you’ll pay. Diplomacy is all about money and the essence of any negotiations is the price range.
5. Any information should be exchanged as a part of a compromise and not merely given away.
6. Always talk less than necessary. Concentrate on facts and never tell the other person about feelings (or your family and medical problems). Don’t interrupt others, try to understand what they really want and if they try to manipulate you. Also, resist giving in to interruptions until you have completed your thoughts – “Just a moment, I haven’t finished”. Use Taleyran approximation – if it’s difficult for you to speak up, try to make just one diplomatic statement. If they press you, insist on moving these questions to experts. And use indirect language such as “It looks like” or “You see situation from a very special angle”.
7. No negative emotions - strong emotions indicate weak nerves. Realize that there might be other issues motivating the other person’s behavior and never take things personally.
8. Stop self-limiting behaviors, such as smiling too much, nodding too much, tilting your head or dropping your eyes in response to other person’s gaze. Speak in a normal conversational volume, don’t scream and don’t whisper, either, as you won’t be taken seriously.
9. Take a problem-solving approach to conflict, and try to see the other person as your collaborator rather than your opposition. You’d better postpone negotiations than allow them to break down.
10. Fix all questions and don’t be in a rush to answer any of them.
11. The slower you talk, the more confident you are.
12. Never ask straight questions.
13. It’s important to know what questions and when you have to ask. Start with an “invitation” question that does not need a definite answer but opens up the discussion, like: “No matter what reporters say, we’ll start negotiating for arms control.” Proceed with “intelligence gathering” questions, like: “Are you going to abide by our last agreement on the withdrawal of military forces or do we have other options?” Go to “expertise” questions, like: “It’s 5000 soldiers, right? ” There’s a difference between expertise and straight questions - straight question are like: “Will you sign the treaty?” and these have to be avoided because you’ll get no straight answer right away. Finish with a closing question, like: “I think that’s what we intend to sign? Next time we can start from here.” Or you can press your partner: “Let’s not lose this last opportunity, eh?”
14. Explain your negative attitude in a smart way: give half the information and continue, depending on your partner’s reaction. If you can’t accept his proposal, tell him that the experts may look into it again and come to agreement. If your partner is not a complete idiot he’ll understand his proposal is unacceptable (because the experts have already done all they could). But if he is an idiot, he’ll agree to “kill” his proposals by passing them to the experts. You start to lose momentum if you start to defend yourself.
15. Stop (postpone) negotiations the moment you start to lose or you could end up in a total failure and that could be used by opposition back home.
16. If you bring ideology - try to win. If you bring national interests, try to find compromise. Be flexible — that’s a sign of strength, not weakness.
17. Don’t make aggressive statements for the media, no matter what.
18. Respect is half a victory, but you usually win when your partner is scared. Avoid open confrontation and respond to personal attacks with humor.
19. Watch the military experts - they are always ready to “push” you. No arms agreement can win ratification without backing from Joint Chiefs, because Congress needs and trusts their expertise, and their disapproval is a strong tool against you in case you ignore their advice. So, think three times before you appoint Joint Chiefs.
20. Take negotiations on the trade deficit very seriously — they often take you nowhere and have zero results as your partner wants you to change your attitude to him completely as well as your international economic policy, while you expect the same favor from him. You can influence one partner but you can’t very easily influence the international system.
21. After you come back home do some positive advertising through the media — in such a way you influence other presidents and future negotiations. If the negotiations resulted in a treaty, “sell” it to the Senate for approval.
22. Negotiation no-nos:
- don’t be confused if your partner threatens you — that means he needs your cooperation. Don’t enter into negotiation right away with high demands.
- don’t touch the toughest issues first. Don’t assume — that’s a sign of weakness.
- don’t hesitate to pause or take a break.
- never say “no” to your partner’s ideas — rather, pack them up in one “package” with your proposals.
The Reykjavik American-Soviet summit (1986) on intermediate-range nuclear missiles is a perfect example of a “package”. The U.S. President Reagan wanted to include human rights, Jewish immigration and Soviet intervention in Afghanistan in the talks. The USSR President Michail Gorbachev said “no”, arms control only. Then Gorbachev attacked – he wanted to put American Strategic Defense Initiative (“Star Wars”) in one “package” with eliminating intermediate-range nuclear forces in Europe and reducing NATO tactical weapons and Warsaw Pact conventional forces. Reagan kissed him “good-bye”.
Negotiations Procedure I.
1. Write a plan.
2. Define your objectives.
3. Identify issues that are open to compromise and those that are not.
4. Conduct research for information to support your objectives and have information to undermine your partner’s position; think what information is available to your partner (State and Defense Departments will help you with that; not the CIA).
5. Find out how your partner negotiates with other leaders (he might have a “rabbit in a hat” for you).
6. Consult with members of a previous negotiating team about his style, strong and weak points.
7. Check the current balance of power. Attention: if you start multilateral negotiations you have to know what are the conflicts or allegiances between other partners. If they are divided into groups, identify who has the power to make a decision on behalf of a group.
8. Use game theory if you are intending to cooperate. Game theory is a theoretical analysis of the decision-making process taken by two or more players who are in conflict. You must actually estimate any possible strategies of the players who have to make decisions without knowledge of what other players are planning. Each player’s strategy, once undertaken, will affect the others.
Game theory is often illustrated by the “prisoner’s dilemma” paradigm. It supposes that two men have been arrested on a suspicion of committing a crime together and are being held in separate cells. There is not enough evidence to prosecute unless one confesses and implicates the other. Both of them know this but cannot talk to each other. The dilemma is that the best outcome, not being convicted, is only available if they each trust the other not to implicate him. If X decides to trust Y, but Y fears X may not be trustworthy, Y may confess to get a lesser sentence; X then gets a worse one. The best solution to this dilemma is for both to cooperate, to minimize the worst that can happen, rather than trying for the outcome that is maximum. This is called the minimax strategy and it’s classified as being the most probable outcome.
II. Conducting negotiations
Never conduct negotiations before 10 a.m. or after 4 p.m. First of all, you have to decide whether you want to speak first or to respond to your partner’s proposal.
There’s an advantage in letting your partner make the opening proposal as it might be much more beneficial for you than you suspect. Then:
a) put forward a proposal (with as little emotion as possible). You have to make your initial offer-demand high and compromise from that point onward. Your partner will understand perfectly well it’s too much, so make your initial demand greater than you expect to receive, and offer less than you are expected to give. (For the same reason feel free to reject the first proposal received.) While talking further, leave yourself room for maneuvering, presenting your proposals, and don’t try to pin down your partner to a fixed position too soon, because he needs room to maneuver, too. Make a final offer when the atmosphere is most cooperative.
b) respond to proposals in a smart way (again, no emotions). Never take the first offer - if you take it, your adversary may feel there is something wrong with it or he didn’t get the best deal. Capture any similarities on both sides. Don’t hesitate to make conditional counter-offers: “If you do this, we’ll do that.” Cut the unexpected introduction of new issues and follow strictly a concise step-by-step agenda. Probe your partner’s attitudes: “What would you say if we both lower our demands?” but indicate that every concession you make is a major loss to you. Ask as many questions as you want — the more information you have, the more you control negotiation. To think over and re-design your strategy, ask for a break as many times as it’s acceptable. Summarize your partner’s proposals.
c) move towards a bargain. You must know perfectly well the response to each of your points before you open your mouth. If your aides can’t help you, you have the wrong aides and you even might be a wrong president. Offer the lowest price first, as you may not need to go any further. Negotiate a “package,” don’t concentrate on one demand and link other, smaller demands to it. While making a final offer look at the other party and check the body language (see below), your team members must confirm by body language that this is your final offer. It’s OK to press the partner by emphasizing the need to reach agreement, like: “We know our nations are waiting to see the treaty signed.” (If your partner looks at his watch, it means he wants to end the talk.) If you see you are approaching a dead end, ask your partner to talk off the record, in private, but if you talk in private, you have to keep your word no matter what. Sometimes negotiations (as in the Israel-Palestine case) run into serious problems and breakdowns. Strong diplomats never say “never” and never leave forever, and always are ready to come back and agree right away on new dates to continue talks, as though a breakdown is just one more pressure trick. The best thing to do is to re-establish communications as soon as possible and you have to do this through your team member who has good connections and influence with other party. Act fast, especially if the consequences of “no deal” would be worse than the last deal that was on the table. If the situation is not improving, you have nothing else but to use a mediator. I do not recommend you to take responsibility as mediator or to use a mediator for your diplomatic needs. International experience shows that these old and “experienced” people usually make the situation worse, like bringing in a lawyer — even if the situation looks better for the next couple of years. But if you have no choice and your partner, and your aides insist on using a mediator to resolve the situation you have to think it over … and agree.
Mediation is the process in which deadlocked parties consider the suggestions of a third party, agreed upon in advance, but are not bound to accept the mediator’s recommendations. The mediator works as a referee between the negotiating parties and tries to find common ground among their agendas. Once some common ground is established, the mediator can begin to look for mutually acceptable ways out of the deadlock. A mediator between presidents has to be a president himself, very influential, and well informed on the situation to be able to make effective recommendations.
He has to:
a) consider the situation from all angles
b) help both parties to understand each other better
c) help the parties to create new approaches
d) suggest a solution, give alternatives
But if the two sides’ demands are too far apart, no outside party can bring them together at all. (Often a mediator has to make multiple trips between two parties, who do not talk directly, and it’s called shuttle diplomacy. Usually, two parties do not formally recognize each other, but still want to negotiate. The term became widespread following Henry Kissinger’s term as National Security Advisor and then, as the United States Secretary of State (in 1973-1977), when he participated in shuttle diplomacy in the Middle East and China).
III. Closing negotiation
That’s the most important part, a final mutual agreement or disagreement, a test for your foreign policy making strategy and tactics and personally for you, your power and your image. Any treaty you sign with foreign leaders, if it meets American interests, is not your personal success, but that of the nation.
There are three options:
a) the agreement with all conditions is acceptable to both parties
b) the agreement is acceptable to one party only
c) the agreement is unacceptable for both parties
Tricks in diplomacy are usually used to distract your hard working team, shift the emphasis of the negotiation in order to shape the deal on terms of your adversary or manipulate your team into closing negotiation and accept terms you don’t really like.
And the tricks are:
“Leap” - your adversary is losing and starts “jumping” from one point to another
“Pile” - your adversary “piles up” problems, tries to provoke a chaotic discussion or stop negotiations
“Empty chair” - a day or two before negotiations start your adversary informs you that he’s not ready yet, trying to press you (or he wants to change location)
“Diplomatic illness” – the practice of feigning illness to avoid participation in negotiations and at the same time to avoid giving formal offense.
“Deaf” - your adversary keeps asking questions instead of answering yours
“Provocation” — your adversary doubts your team’s professional level and your ability to negotiate
“Busy guy” — your adversary breaks negotiation for an hour or two pretending he has to do some very important business (or that he got a very important call).
“Mirror” - it’s a very interesting “programming” trick. The technology is simple: you try to “mirror” your adversary’s style and behavior, adopt a similar posture, use his gestures, and follow the speed of his speech. First, he will like it subconsciously and will be more open to you. Second, you’ll understand better his way of thinking.
“Sandwich” - pressure (often — military) — negotiations — pressure
“Show” - using certain arguments your adversary appeals to your emotions
“Circle” - a very sophisticated trick: your adversary tries to “push” his proposal in different variants and finally comes back to his initial variant, trying to convince you that’s the best choice
“Carrot and stick” - threat (blackmail) plus promises (money). The guy could blackmail you also by demanding to set a deadline
“Student” - your adversary talks too much about the details, asking a lot of minor questions, trying to make you nervous and make mistakes
“Donkey” – your adversary declines the offer to speak first
“Ball” - encourage your adversary if he’s looking for “global decisions” and he’ll do a lot of minor favors
“Rubber” - delay, if you can’t predict the result, and press your adversary by delaying the answer
“Last train” - you can press your adversary by an ultimatum right before negotiations are over, if he really is interested in some result. “Spice” the ultimatum with some important reasons and give your adversary a choice of variants. You can also leak opposing demands to the media (be careful with this one. Do not betray diplomatic trust by talking about secret deals or demands that actually have been mentioned). You may also escalate your demands during negotiation and manipulate public opinion to line up behind your demands.
Diplomatic Double Talk Statement Meaning
We are disappointed. We got nothing. Situation disturbs us. It’s unacceptable no matter what. There are still differences between. There are huge differences. Our approaches to the problem. We can’t accept this deal. This means trouble. We reserve the right to use any means to prevent further worsening of the situation. This means war. Discussion helped us to understand each other better. We’ve wasted our time. We don’t understand your attitude. Stop it immediately. I’m trying to understand your position. Understand me too, idiot! If I’ve understood you correctly, you don’t agree. Do you have any other option? We both will pay a very high price if we don’t reach agreement. Yes, that’s a threat!
This Chapter as in all the chapters posted here have been edited and a spell check performed. Since Tom Smith originally used the SlantRight.com “Comment” system, I received the Chapters to “The Professional” as a jumble of sentences. My task in editing was to make the chapters coherent for reading. There is an extreme likelihood my editing is a variation to the original Kryzhanovsky manuscript.
Who is Tom Smith? I do not have a clue. I presume the comment author is a pseudonym.