Well, firstly, If we look at what policy actually is: "A policy is a plan of action to guide decisions and actions."
Now, if we look at the actual process of looking behind the eyes of your enemy. What would we see. Is seeing through the eyes of our enemy actually a good thing?
Well, there are some obvious advantages of being able to perceive our enemy's next move. We could see the gaps in our defence, for one, and we can see where our enemy is next going to attack. But, this is true only in matters concerning warfare. Yes, it is handy to know the policy of our enemies on certain issues such as nuclear warheads, human rights, foreign policy, etc. But why would it be necessary to know the policy of our enemy in any other context, such as educational policy, etc.
So, I think it can be argued that in order to make a clear, expert opinion on a plan of action, one should be able to see through the eyes of their enemy. And certainly, this is not a bad thing when it comes to a situation where military conflict has broken out. But, it is not always necessary.
[EDIT] Just read that, and it seems a bit crap, but I don't want to delete it..........
Because policy on education is related to foreign policy and human rights and the general direction of the state as an ideological unit. All areas of policy are interconnected and interdependent. A good example of monitoring education policy in another state: The whitewashing of certain periods of Japanese history in secondary school-level textbooks signalled to some in neighbouring states that there was resurgent streak of Japanese nationalism, and this had a flow-on effect for their security policies etc.
There is no explicit disadvantage for policy-makers being able to accurately assess the worldviews of other states (and therefore the direction of their policies). However, something about thelistmakers statement doesn't sit comfortably with me, perhaps it was the use of the words 'should' and 'enemy'. In any case I agree with it in principle.
Not sure that I agree totally with the statement. I do believe that who ever has influence on policy should, no MUST, have the ability to see all sides of an issue so that they can make a persuasive arguement about the decisions they come up with or support. Too often, I believe, policy makers make decisions on what they "think people" will support. They give far too much weight to polls. Good policy does not necessarily translate into "publicly acceptable".