It’s not every day, or every year, that an ambassador is assassinated in a foreign land. Rarer still is such an assassination to an ambassador who has gone above and beyond the call of duty to help the country that he is sent to, whose citizens (apparently) responded not with appreciation and gratitude, but with a staged demonstration followed by a cowardly attack. Attacks on ambassadors are very rare, and being an ambassador imbues one with a sanctity known as diplomatic immunity, which some may abuse, but which helps preserve some level of dignity and respect in a world that has precious little of either. Where ambassadors are not safe, a nation lacks legitimacy in the eyes of the world. And a nation that will not protect or avenge its ambassadors will not be respected around the world.

In the 13th century AD, a Muslim nation in Central Asia fancied itself to be above the international ethical standards that even in those barbaric times led ambassadors to be protected. At that time, it was customary for nations to use their internationally inclined businessmen or missionaries as ambassadors to far-flung nations, often for periods of decades, to ensure peaceful trade and religious freedoms and other areas of common interest. When this Shah murdered merchants of a neighboring nomadic realm killed, he and his people faced the wrath of the Mongol Empire, who killed millions of people in vengeance for the death of their envoys (merchants who often doubled as spies even in those times). And, truth to be told, the Mongols were justified in so doing. An attack on am ambassador is an act of war against the country that ambassador represents.

If we are religious people, we will recognize that we are called as ambassadors of the Kingdom of Heaven, citizens of the Jerusalem above dwelling in the earth below, ambassadors of the Kingdom of God. In the Roman Empire, ambassadors were often sent by that empire to rebellious provinces, who were not even treated as if they were a part of the orderly Roman Empire, but rather were part of a realm of war and struggle, still needing to be subdued. Once subdued, they could be governed as provinces by consuls, but until then they were treated as foreign realms under military occupation. But even there, ambassadors were considered to be inviolate. An attack open a representative of a nation is an attack on the nation that is represented, and throughout history nations have tended to respond that way.

Clearly, not all nations respect these international standards that represent at least some basic and minimal respect for others. It is striking that throughout history so many of these nations that have problems respecting the envoys of other nations are Muslim nations. Whether we are talking about the Shah of some long-forgotten Central Asian Empire, or the ayotollah of Iran, or the rebels of Libya who killed an ambassador who had been instrumental in helping them to topple their own late dictator, it appears as if a certain ideology in the hearts and minds of some has overwhelmed the capacity to recognize and treat others (even Americans) as human beings like themselves, worthy of respect and honor.

We ought to be plain about two facts. One is that Muslim nations and realms, particularly of the fundamentalist variety, seem particularly disrespectful of others. Despite the fact that every religious system and worldview contains some form of the Golden Rule, Muslim fundamentalists throughout history (and particularly in recent decades), have been very poor about respecting and honoring ambassadors from other nations on political grounds, directly contrary to their own deeply cherished religious beliefs. Had they been truly moral and religious, they would respect all mankind, even their enemies, and recognize that God is strong enough to defend His own interests without needing terrorism and atrocities from his professed believers.

And likewise, a nation should be strong enough to defend its own interests, particularly those of dignity and respect. In 1979, the Iranian revolutionaries attacked the US embassy (interestingly enough, the same year the Pakistanis attacked the US embassy there based on some false radio reports), dramatically hurting the prestige of President Carter, whose ineffectual response to the crisis hurt his own legitimacy and helped make him a one-term president, given the lack of tolerance Americans have for malaise and for leaders who do not defend American citizens abroad. Those who are less than charitable readers may compare Carter’s ineffective response with the “stern warning” given to the assassins of the late US Ambassador to Libya, and they may long for the day when nations honored their envoys like the Mongol Empire died.

Less charitable readers may also be aware of the stark contrast between the behavior of the Obama administration to the Gaddafi regime, which it threw out of power through aiding rebels substantially through logistics support, and their lack of strong support of the late US ambassador. Those who criticized President George W. Bush on his follies in nation-building, and on the difficulties in helping democracy and legitimate governments flourish in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan would do well to compare his efforts with Obama’s efforts in the so-called Arab Spring. Nation building is difficult no matter who does it, and it is always far easier to remove a regime from power than it is to replace it with something equally powerful but legitimate, particularly in parts of the world where respect for law and the dignity of foreign nationals appears to be weak.

At any rate, now we are stuck with the consequences of our actions. While a certain amount of naive idealism has led to the belief that the removal of dictators all over the Middle East will lead to a flowering of native Muslim democracies, it appears that in the aftermath of decades of tyranny and oppression that anarchy appears to be ascendent instead of the principled constitutional order that Americans seek to practice and desire to promote around the world. As imperfectly as we all represent our most cherished ideals, all humanity is worthy of respect, even if our respect for ourselves requires that we punish evildoers who cannot respect us. Hopefully our leaders are not so craven and cowardly that they cannot show themselves to be proper leaders for these dangerous times.