Letters

Write for The Iranian Editorial policy

Friday
May 11, 2001

Comon standards of morality

With much thanks to Bahram Rajaee for his kind comments ["Look in the mirror"] on my opinion piece regarding the Khobar bombing, I would like to remind Mr. Rajaee that the historical misdeeds of Israel such as the Lavon Affair was not brought up ["Ghost of Khobar"] as an excuse or justification for the historical misdeeds of the IRI, whatever they may have been. Rather, my point was that a credible hypothetical case can also be made for Israel's inclusion in the constellation of potential culprits of the Khobar bombing, just as a hypothetical case has been made for Iran's involvement.

Second, I did not express an opinion on whether opponents to a normalization of US-Iran ties are predominantly Jewish (I prefer "pro-Israeli") or not. Indeed, I can think of many people in addition to Jewish and non-Jewish pro-Israeli lobbyists who are opposed to the removal of the sanctions, including some Iranians (of whatever religion) such as the Mojahedin and the monarchists and probably California pistachio growers, and maybe even the dealers of Pakistani and Indian hand-woven carpets. That's at least five or six other people who are opposed to the removal of the sanctions right there.

As for whether Iran "has a dog" in the Arab-Israeli fight or not, that too was an issue which I did not express an opinion on. But let me now make two points in that regard: First (sticking with the canine metaphor) Iran is but another dog in a dog-eat-dog world, and as such we can't help but be involved in what happens in the Middle East.

In fact, even if the Palestinians and Lebanese didn't exist, and regardless of what type of government was in power in either country or the religious persuasions of their majority populations, Israel and Iran would probably still consider each other to be potential geo-strategic threats simply because the nature of international relations is fundmentally competitive (especially in a "rough neighborhood" such as the Mideast.)

For example, Israel's possession of weapons of mass destruction and a significant offensive military superiority over Iran would certainly be no cause for celebration in Tehran even if the Shah were still in power, and steps would be taken to deter, neutralize and counter-act such threats rather than to play see-no-evil, hear-no-evil.

Finally, I can't help but notice a contradiction as Mr. Rajaee condemn Iran's abuses, but prefers silence and inactivity in the face of Israeli abuses. I think we can agree that neither one excuses or justifies the other, and it is entirely possible for people to condemn both.

Anyway, while the theorists still argue over whether morality has a role in power politics, surely if Mr. Rajaee asserts a moral standard on the actions of "the murderous behavior of this small group of powerful people in Iran over the last 15-20 years", then he would also agree that standards of morality are not restricted to Iran's national borders, and would also apply to other states. After all, we are Iranians, but we are also part of the rest of humanity.

With warm regards (and thanks for all the supportive emails sent to me by other readers of The Iranian.)

John Mohammadi

Comment for The Iranian letters section