SPY EYES

Amidst the ‘anti-Ahmadinejad’ sentiment gushing all over the media, it is vital to understand the source of such negativity towards one man and hence his people. Iran’s President is known for his fiery speeches, and ability to offend the ‘painfully polite’ decorum of the United Nations General Assembly.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a democratically elected leader has conveniently been labeled a ‘dictator’. During the UN General Assembly, Ahmadinejad attacked the United States for history of slavery, causing two world wars, using a nuclear bomb against “defenseless people,” and imposing and supporting military dictatorships and totalitarian regimes on Asian, African and Latin American nations. Obama led a ‘walk out’ which was honored by a dozen more delegates including France.

How are these remarks offensive? The United States has had a history of Slavery and even today Racism remains an issue. It should be a matter of public concern on the same level as, say, Discrimination against women has been in many Muslim countries. Denying or ‘taking offense’ if we are reminded of our inglorious past is petty to say the least. The ‘collateral damage’ during the post 9/11 decade, in search of the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and ‘Osama bin Laden’ can only count as aggression against defenseless people. As for the last allegation regarding Dictatorships, whether they have been good or bad for the Economic, Political and Social Stability of the states under question, it is true that USA has supported Dictators time and again. In Pakistan’s case, Ayub Khan, Zia-ul-Haq and Prevez Musharraf’s decades in power mark the highest points in Pak-US Alliance. Dictators in the past have suited US for various known reasons and hence supporting them was perhaps only logical at given points in history. So why can’t the US accept this fact? We in Pakistan understand, observe and assume that Nation States act as Rational Actors. It only makes sense for US to have supported the three dictators in Pakistan’s history. Then why deny doing so?

Apart from being strongly opinionated in World affairs and distorting the favorable ‘flow’ of events, Ahmadinejad is also accused of implementing domestic Internal Policies that are not Human Rights Friendly.

He had the audacity to deny the existence of homosexuals in Iran, while addressing students at Columbia (September 2007). Homosexuals in the most Liberal Democracy only recently created a platform for their rights, and to date struggle for the right of Same-sex marriages, then why take so much offense? If a state is governed by Islamic principles then perhaps they deem it appropriate to condemn what is considered sin. That being their problem, the ‘holier than thou’ attitude of the American Joe is amusing.

Obviously out of Internal Matters, lack of regard for Homosexuality is not the only allegation against the man and his regime. The Wikipedia page states:

Even if these claims hold true, the fact remains that in most countries, including US, treatment of prisoners has only worsened post 9/11.

So for not acknowledging and respecting the newfound ‘homosexuality’ that has promoted American masses to a higher moral platform, and being ‘cruel’ to his people, and for calling the West a bullying nations, the Iranian President has been labeled ‘Controversial’. He just is Controversial; because he refuses to speak the language of the Global Establishment. And this audacity with which he refutes and criticizes those whose intentions dare not be questioned is threatening. On the contrary, those who ‘fail’ to speak the acceptable language might be forgiven for their lack of intellect. But the deliberate digresser is to be ridiculed to preserve Global Peace. The Mirage of Peace that our leader, the Savior of all, United States of America, with the help of their sidekick, the UN, have successfully managed to construct.

The solution is simple, questions need to be asked and evidence needs to be provided. War is no joke, the ‘Collateral Damage’ is the only damage that’s been done to date. No evidence has been provided by the American Government about the OBL assassination, and the body was simply drowned? No Cameras? And in the backyard of Pakistan’s military training centre?

Who decides what is controversial? Ahmadinejad’s statements at the UN General Assembly this year and during previous years have made headlines. Last year in the General Assembly he predicted the downfall of the Capitalist System

“The discriminatory order of capitalism and the hegemonic approaches are facing defeat and are getting close to their end”.

Today we see the Occupy protests gaining momentum in especially those States whose representatives chose to walk out when their system was criticized. Obviously back then this statement was mocked and Ahmadinejad ended up on ‘Fail’ blogs under the ‘psychotic dictator’ section. But perhaps these protests could have been avoided if the criticisms generated towards the ‘Capitalist System’ hadn’t just been ridiculed.

To bridge the communication gap that has been growing, assumptions about Iran made by Western Media and internalized by the American masses need to be questioned.

Firstly, even though the Regime wants to be a Nuclear Power, it might as well want a peaceful civilian nuclear program. The Regime’s founder Ayatollah Khomeini is quoted to have stated that such weapons are un-Islamic. So in 2004, the leader issued a Fatwa that labeled Nuclear Weapons as Immoral. One could argue that they could be ‘lying’, but that seems a bleak possibility from a regime that derives legitimacy from its loyalty to Islam.

Secondly, Iranians are not suicidal. They’re known rather, for being calculative, and shrewd. For instance they chose to assist US in creation of the Karzai Government against Taliban, but worked against US in Iraq, not wanting the creation of a pro-US puppet across the border.

Thirdly, Iran is not a dictatorship. Even though the Regime closes down printing houses, keeps a close eye on the media and tolerates few challenges in its way, it is anything but a monolithic dictatorship. Ahmadinejad runs the country, yes, but the internal strife between him and the ‘mullahs’ and even now he deliberately tries to undermine their authority. Therefore to assume that Ahmadinejad, a cruel dictator and violator of Human Rights cannot hold the way media tends to portray. The constitution simply doesn’t give that much power, even if intentions may be doubted.

The incidents of September 11, 2001, tragic as they were, have not only been questioned by Ahmadinejad. Elements within the United States have asked the State to provide more substantial evidence, and direct answer. It is easy to label other narratives as Conspiracy Theories and hence bash them, but what’s difficult to justify is the establishment’s ‘bullying’.

Sensitive topics like 9/11 and the Holocaust have been dreadful and the wounds they left have still not been heeled. And it wouldn’t be wrong to assume that these sensitive topics are never spoken of, but merely referred to briefly but sufficiently to remind the masses: more needs to be done. This façade of a mission against the ‘wrong doers’ has been kept alive and used time and again to revive the ‘spirit’ and maintain support.

This politics of the offensive has drawn lines, barriers, and created myths. With the help of strong media strategy and a population busy in the fast paced system it has been easier for the Establishment to indoctrinate the people with the State Ideology. Now, as the Liberal System’s flaws are creeping onto the surface, the masses have become skeptical of what they’re being told. The Iranian Assassination Plot raised wide criticism all over the World, and pointed fingers not at Iran but at the US. And with lack of support from the International Community and back home, their claims are toning down. Ahmadinejad in a live interview with Al-Jazeera has compared the assassination plot to Iraqi weapons of ‘Mass Destruction’. He claims that US wants to create a rift between Jeddah and Tehran. There is also evidence that suggests Saudi wants US to cut the ‘head of the snake’ because Tehran’s Nuclear Program threatens their position in the region. So evidence suggests that US has enough stakes in the region to want to ‘fabricate’ an assassination plot.

However, times have changed; we, the masses, have become more critical of the Establishment’s intentions, and perhaps all the persuasive plots have already been taken. This story will need new scriptwriters.

Tacstrat Analysis
By Zoon Ahmad Khan