Monday's Ha'arerz ran an article, reprinted from the New York Times, about how the Iranian people like Americans and American culture, and would like to restore relations with the United States. This made me think about the sad fact that Iran, one of the greatest nations in the world, is run by one of the worst regimes in the world. Sadly, unlike the United States and Israel, where the horrible governments currently in power could be replaced through elections, in Iran an election is not enough. The regime has to change into the kind of democratic regime the Persian people deserve, and nobody can do this but the people of Iran themselves.
I don't want the Ayatollahs to have nuclear weapons. However, were the regime to change into a non-theocratic Ayatollah-free democracy, I'd have no problem with the new Iran having nuclear capabilities. That is, if the new form of government is stable enough not to fall and be repaced by a second Islamic revolution.
The chances that the Islamic Republic of Iran would attack Israel with a nuclear weapon are not great, but the possibility still exists. The main threat from a nuclear Iran would be a change in the balance of power toward the governments and groups more hostile towards Israel, the United States and Western Europe. Reaching peace with our neighbors would be even more difficult than it currently is. However, a secular Iran that does not support groups like Hizbullah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, would be a positive force in the region, with or without nukes.
The Iranian population supports the nuclear program. Once they get rid of the theocracy, there will be no reason to deny them their wishes.
Farewell to Steve Silberman
2 days ago
One they get rid of the theocracy, there will be no reason to deny them their wishes.
ReplyDeleteI have many, many problems with my government but that is exactly the type of Orientalist jargon that I have even more of a problem with.
The problem of Iran is that the "problem" is far too complex for most people unfamiliar with the history & geography to understand. Many of us Iranians, despite all the evil we see in our government, and despite what outsiders might think, do not wish for another revolution, and do not wish to have our government toppled. After a century of two revolutions and a bloody 8 year war, we have realized that the path of extremism is not one which we shall take again.
(You might think otherwise, but despite the images coming out of Iran, we are not extremists)
(I could get into a lengthy discussion on what it is that we do want, but that's another day, and another cup of coffee ...)
Sadly, unlike the United States and Israel, where the horrible governments currently in power could be replaced through elections, in Iran an election is not enough.
I do not know about Israel, but as for the United States - it is not up to any election. It is the system that is dysfunctional. It is the system that has, in the years after World War II, been weaned on destroying lives and people and possibility ... in Indonesia, Chile, Iran, Guatemala, Iraq, etc, etc ... their domestic policies might change but on the world scene, nothing does ...
The most gruesome thing of all is that they wear Armani suits!
You can get away with bombing the universe if you are wearing a nice suit ...
After a century of two revolutions and a bloody 8 year war, we have realized that the path of extremism is not one which we shall take again.
ReplyDeleteYou don't see your current form of government as an extremist theocratic regime? Most Iranians aren't extremists, but I'd say the government is. Wanting to get out of such a situation isn't extremism. Maybe there is even a peacefull way to change your form of government, without extreme measures such as a new revolution and bloodshed.
(I could get into a lengthy discussion on what it is that we do want, but that's another day, and another cup of coffee ...)
I'm interested in hearing this. We here in Israel never actually hear from regular Iranians (not government officials, I mean).
I do not know about Israel, but as for the United States - it is not up to any election. It is the system that is dysfunctional.
I agree that the United States has made some horrible and immoral foreign policy decisions in the last few decades, but it does change from president to president to a certain extent. Look at Bill Clinton - he didn't do much damage internationally.
By the way, what did the US do to Indonesia? (Excuse my ignorance)
You don't see your current form of government as an extremist theocratic regime?
ReplyDeleteYes (and no)!
Iran is a theocracy. But it's a muddled up form of government where there are limited democratic loopholes.
It is popular belief that "nothing" Is in the hands of the president or parliament. and that the guardian council only allows its own. That is true to some degree. But it's still a huge misinterpretation. Living 4 years under Ahmadinejad and a neo-conservative parliament is more than proof. Our lives do depend on these institutions. And our elections (not the last two) do offer variations.
But that's the thing with extremists: their worst crime is that they wipe out all opponents. That's exactly what the shah did. That's the situation today.
"We don't want extremism" meaning in that we do not want another extreme attempt at toppling our current system. We want a peaceful transition from this current state to another. And until century old conflicts are resolved, nothing will change! Only the attire of the dictators will.
And at the end of the day, with so many extremists ruling the world, it is horrendous to see what sort of treatment our extremists get.
I will criticize my government unrelentlessly, but that's "my" job. When it is accused of fanaticism by the world's most powerful, destructive fanatics, that really, really pisses me off.
I don't want the Ayatollahs to have nuclear weapons. However, were the regime to change into a non-theocratic Ayatollah-free democracy, I'd have no problem with the new Iran having nuclear capabilities.
Well, I don't want Bush to have them! Or Ariel Sharon! But to that you will say: "tough luck!"
And I have no argument to that. It's a dog eat dog world and despite all our rhetoric, the gun has the final say.
But that's the thing: the rhetoric. When the "gun" proposes that is the leader of "the free world" and "righteous values" ...
In the face of foreign aggression, the Ayatollahs are "my" leaders and I do not want the world to do them harm.
As for Clinton, I agree. But I will say that with a pinch of salt. It took 30 to 40 years for us to find out what the Americans were up to and what HUGE levels of involvement they had in worldwide catastrophes. So I'd wait a few decades to see what sort of *&#@ falls out of this bag!
The CIA, along with Indonesia's own right wingers was heavily involved
in the fall of President Sukarno(and all that came after it).
Sukarno was no saint, but I don't think that is the problem here.
Interesting to see a little dialogue between an ordinary Israeli and an ordinary Iranian (even if neither of you are actually ordinary in the strict sense of the word). I remember visiting Pedestrian's blog when I conducted a large surf of the Iranian blogosphere to try and find out whether Ahmedinejad really meant what he's said about "wiping Israel off the map" or whether there was some self-serving Western/Israeli distortion of that statement.
ReplyDeleteWhile direct dialogue between citizens of Western countries, the US, Israel on the one hand and Iran on the other hand is difficult in practical terms, it would be a great step forward in deconstructing the cacophony of demonisation that seems to be the fodder of our 'free' presses...
I also remember one of those real small time initiatives not so long ago by a small number (a dozen or so) very middle of the road US senior citizens to visit Tehran to see "what the fuss was all about". Needless to say, I never found a follow-up story to their trip or what conclusions they had drawn from it. It sells more copy to paint the other guys as the True Satans, the next Hitlers and assorted mutual and reciprocal negative nonsense than to explore the possibility that maybe, just maybe, we share at least one thing: humanity...
As regards the allegedly impending 'unavoidable' conflict: it sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy if I've ever heard one...
I have a feeling this conflict is very avoidable. It would be best for all parties involved to resolve this diplomatically. I just hope Ehud Olmert won't have a "wag the dog" moment.
ReplyDeleteDuring the Second Lebanon War, which began exactly two years ago today, Israeli and Lebanese bloggers had some kind of dialogue going on. I don't think that continued. Too bad. The Internet should be utilized for dialogue between "enemies" (I put it in quotes since the countries really are enemies, but the people aren't).
Well, it's not (on the Israeli side) Olmert I'm worried about (seems he's being politically destroyed anyway- not sure whether there is fire with that smoke or whether this is the usual internecine witchhunting, so popular in modern liberal democracies) but the real hawks: Barak and worse - Bibi and even worse - take your pick on the Ultra side.... Hard also from where I stand to sense the real mood in the country.
ReplyDeleteRegards the dialogue between Lebanese and Israeli bloggers in the run-up and during to Leb II, I recall that. But it's hard to keep that kind of thing going when the shooting actually starts to strike home...
Hard also from where I stand to sense the real mood in the country.
ReplyDeleteGert, that's why I think Ahmadinejad's statements were all the more absurd (aside from being waaaaaay out of the leagues of decorum - quite wrong, insane and insulting!)
I'm not trying to make any excuses, but he did not mean those words as genocidal ones. His words were symbolic, very similar to Reagan's "ash heap of history" comment about the Soviet Union (with the difference that Regan's administration was not a 'symbolic' one and carried out its interests all around the world from Nicaragua to Iraq and Iran).
But most people, too fed on CNN and their local papers don't know that! They don't know that he's not in anyways in control of the army and they are not going to spend an hour on their computers trying to figure out what he really meant. What the situation in Iran is today , what our history is, what our real intents are, etc etc.
And their governments are not going to tell them ...
One of the things extremists (of any kind ... Israeli, Iranian, American, does not matter!) need is frightened people.
That's why I think extremists all around the world fuel each other's purpose. Ahamdinejad and the hawks in the U.S. or Israel may run down each other's throats but in fact they help the other get stronger and more vicious ...
And although I'd like to think differently, and although the internet has provided an outlet for some of us, at the end of the day, I'm not sure it has garnered change in the mass of society ...
Most people will buy what their TV sets tell them ...
Pedestrian:
ReplyDeleteThat's why I think extremists all around the world fuel each other's purpose. Ahamdinejad and the hawks in the U.S. or Israel may run down each other's throats but in fact they help the other get stronger and more vicious ...
Couldn't agree with you more: extremists the world around mirror each other in any conflict. The Israeli/Palestinian conflict is an interesting point in case. There too there are some embarrassingly extremist (and often obscure) Palestinian factions that do call for the destruction of Israel and the death of Jews, only to be mirrored by a small number of Israeli hotheads, calling for the wholesale transfer (and worse besides that) of Palestinians (although deeply insultingly they claim these Palestinians don't actually exist anyway...)
Unfortunately, in the shouting part of any war, those who shout the loudest win that part. And so the representation of hard, hawkish viewpoints in the media is quite disproportionate to their actual numbers, whether those media are Western, Muslim, Christian or Arab controlled, whether we're talking TV or Internet. The Internet IMHO has only made things worse, since as every armchair general can now get his own soapbox for free... or even make a few bucks selling T-shirts with "Nuke Iran" on them...