Ask yourself, what do you actually know about Iran and how do you know it? Have you been there? Studied its history, archaeology, the early Zoroastrian religion? Differences between Shia and Sunni cultures? If you haven’t read anything other than what you’ve been offered in our mainstream press could you accept that you just might have absorbed the assertions of our press and government, based on their evidence, that they are our enemies? This is how we came to hate (and then not)- the Germans and Japanese, the Russians, then the Vietnamese and then the Iraquis and Afghanis. Somewhere along this meander through shifting loyalties, it probably occurs to many that these narratives are created by our government (and all governments) to shape public opinion and passion in a manner that will serve their interests----whether or not they serve the interests of the citizens.
Let’s start with the fact that Iran is the world’s oldest continuous civilization, more than 4000 years old. Let’s add that they are not Arabs--- Iran is etymologically related to “Aryan”, and their culture could not be more different than their Arab neighbors, as is their native language of Farsi.
For practical purposes,America’s difficulties with Iran seem to stem from 1979 when our Ambassadorial staff there was held hostage for 444 days. The stand-off ended Jimmy Carter’s re-election hopes and there have been rumors for many years that back-channel negotiations from the Reagan camp (the November surprise) urged the Iranians to hold their release until after the election. (They were released on the day Reagan was inaugurated.) Many suggest that is the reason that Reagan sold them missiles in what later became the Iran-Contra scandal. In any event, the United States has never forgiven the Iranians for the kidnapping and imprisonment of our diplomats.
It is an unfortunate historical myopia, because it overlooks the fact that in 1953 British and American Intelligence overthrew Iran’s democratically elected President, Mohammed Mossadeq, (Project Ajax) for having the temerity to want to nationalize his country’s oil and see that the Iranians received a larger share of its revenues. The CIA intervention was publicly known and bragged about. The American effort was led by Kermit Roosevelt who hired thugs to create street events and destabilize the economy---heady days for the Agency.
When the government fell, the American inserted Reza Pahlavi as the Shah, a man who revolted his own CIA supporters. For the next 25 years the Shah and his dreaded SAVAK secret police, “disappeared,” Liberal Iranians imprisoned, tortured and savagely murdered union organizers, political reformers, and human rights advocates. Memories of those events continue to percolate through the souls and psyches of survivors and might explain Iran’s obdurate resistance to American plans in the Middle East. The Shah’s behavior ultimately created a backlash which led to the his ouster by the people and the institution of the Mullahs as the true political power. To divorce American complicity in this overthrow from current events is like trying to explain the tensions in America’s relationship with Black people without ever mentioning slavery.
As a major power, one might expect that the Iranian would want (and deserve) to know how America sees their enduring role in the Middle East? If they are not included “in the tent” what inducement do they have to cooperate? Certainly any Nation deserves at least a guarantee against ‘no-first-use’ of nuclear weapons, however America refuses to offer this palliative to Iran---an implicit threat which reminds us that “threatening” to use a weapon is actually using the weapon. Without either, what inducement is there for Iranian to cooperate with American ambitions in the region?
We need to look at the nuclear issue, and the “red line” the Americans and Israelis have created which is behind the current crisis. If American pride were not at stake, what would it actually mean if Iran had a nuclear weapon? Perhaps, as signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty are telling the truth and simply creating nuclear power. Perhaps not. Perhaps they noted the difference between the way the North Koreans and the Iraquis were treated by America, with and without the Bomb. In any event, as the only power on Earth ever to use nuclear weapons (twice) what is America’s moral standing (other than raw power and threat) to patriarchically assert that Iran must not get the bomb? We have already postured ourselves as an enemy, why should they listen?
According to Ploughshares Russia currently possesses 10,000 nuclear weapons, America 8,000 and Israel 80 (though some estimate 200). There are, at best estimate 19,000 nuclear weapons on Earth at this moment. Realistically, what could one more mean? If we are clear-headed about it, we can see that it is not who has the weapons (as if the world can be conveniently divided into Good Guys and Bad Guys), but the weapons themselves that pose the threat to continued existence on the Planet. Ask any Afghani or Pakistan victim of Drone attacks who the ‘good guys’ are? Ask any of the tortured from Abu Ghraib, or relatives of the (estimated 1 million) murdered in Iraq who the good guys are and you will get a very different interpretation than the one promulgated by our press.
The fact is that each country’s leaders has a narrative which helps them maintain power at home. The United States is not run by a superior class of humans without greed, hate, and delusion (look at the Congress and Supreme Court). Any ‘weapon’ which has to be perfectly sequestered from the entire biosphere for 250,000 years, is unsafe for any humans to have and hold. (Have you never said “Ooops” in your life? Never had a car or computer fail?)
The Mullahs who actually hold the real power in Iran (not President Ahmadinejad) may be any number of things, but they are canny, practical men who want to live and exert power and enjoy the fruits of being on top. They are uninterested in suicide, and they know that should they actually bomb Israel they would be wiped off the face of the map. For practical purposes, America’s intransigence affords Ahmadinejad the opportunity of ‘standing up’ to America and playing it large for the folks at home and little more. But it’s always worthwhile asking ourselves, “Who are we to tell other sovereign nations what to do?” We haven’t gotten rid of our nukes as we’re supposed to be doing under the terms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Isn’t this a bit like dad, smoking while he delivers an anti-smoking lecture to the kids?
It might surprise people to know that Iran’s nuclear program was begun by Henry Kissinger, (look it up) who wanted to ensure that the maximal amount of oil was available to Americans. When the Iranians decided that they could make more money off selling oil rather than burning it domestically, they began their program. They are signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (unlike Israel, India, and Pakistan with whom we maintain good relationships) and have, until recently been subject to inspections.
We Americans are contributing to the destabilizing of the world by uncritically supporting Israel over the Palestinians (as opposed to being an honest broker between them) and allowing our search for oil and resources to take us into foreign wars in the middle east. [I can’t be the only one old enough to remember Dick Cheney’s bringing the Taliban to the White House to cut a deal on an oil/gas pipeline to circumvent Russia and sell oil and gas from Tajikistan directly to China and India? The plan hinged on a stabilized Afghanistan. All word on that subject has evaporated from the press, and instead our leaders consider us credulous enough to argue that we spent a Trillion dollars to execute Osama Bin Laden and break up a training camp of 19 dead Al Quaeda operatives who flew into the World Trade Towers. And we did this to protect Hamid Karzai, a corrupt thug with ties to drug dealers, whose soldiers are killing ours as we train them? Or perhaps Pakistan another ally who fired on our helicopters and refuses to rout out gangsters on their border? It defies the smell test, folks. What might we have said if the Mexicans had bombed Brooklyn to kill John Gotti as we bombed Baghdad to get Sadaam. At the end of the day, what did we actually win?
The United States is picking up the lion’s share of NATO, we have military installations at virtually every oil-drilling site in Africa; have troops in Germany and Japan, and all the while, our “Homeland” (another offensive and made up word I never once heard until I was over sixty) is turning into a Third World Country. Our military budget, as large as the next 45 largest countries’ military budgets put together, is, under cover of “serving the troops” being diverted to the stockholders of Boeing, Northrup, Grumman and Lockheed and weapons systems which bear no relationship to the conflicts in which we are actually engaged.
Perhaps it’s time that We the People wake up, and refuse our blank-check offer of the benefit-of-the-doubt to our leaders and their simplistic narratives. We could cut through the Gordian knot of Alec and the Koch Brothers and similar Facist interactions of the corporate sector and government in a clean sweep by demanding full Federal financing of elections, and prohibiting corporations from spending their treasuries in elections. We have an opportunity to replay events and get them right in Iran, but nothing will happen when we try to impose our will based on a non-existent moral authority which is actually a surrogate for siphoning public wealth to the corporate sector.