Letters

Write for The Iranian Editorial policy

Monday
May 14, 2001

They've heard that song

I'd like to offer some final thoughts on the many supportive comments made by The Iranian's readership regarding my views ["Look in the mirror"], as well as John Mohammadi's rebuttal ["Common standards of moraliy"].

Much can be extrapolated from my own and John's original pieces ["Ghost of Khobar"], and for clarification I think it's appropriate to reintroduce some of the elements that I thought were central to both--in order to illustrate exactly how much we agree rather than disagree. Bearing in mind that the essence of my argument was that in the U.S. today it is extremely difficult to get policy makers and political interests to focus and act on "the facts" regarding to U.S.-Iranian relations, I'd like to briefly make the following two points:

First, the principal group that I had in mind when I brought up the issue of powerful political interests in Washington that are opposed to the normalization of U.S.-Iranian relations is far more central to American politics than the MKO, Californian pistachio growers, Pakistani rug weavers, or even the Zionist or pro-Israeli lobby groups. We are talking, quite simply, about the hardline leadership of the Republican Party in Congress, and in particular, the House of Representatives: Tom DeLay, Benjamin Gilman, and Dick Armey (just to name a few).

In a slightly broader sense, the right wing of the Republican Party is home to a confluence of interests, which over the past two decades has used an anti-IRI platform to its political advantage. When combined with the pro-Israeli tendencies of broad swathes of liberal Democrats that court the Jewish vote in the Northeast and Florida, you get a Congress that consistently advocates policy toward Iran that is frozen in its own paranoia, and is fed by very effective lobbying by outside groups.

The challenge, therefore, is to figure out how to get this cast of characters to listen to "the facts," as Mr. Mohammadi so ably laid them out regarding Khobar, and on a host of other issues relating to U.S.-Iranian ties, such as the ILSA sanctions, U.S. opposition to multilateral lending to Iran, and the trade embargo.

My point was simply that raising the issue of Israeli transgressions in order to make any headway in rehabilitating Iran in their eyes will probably not work. They've heard that song and dance from the Arabs many times before, and regardless of how true it is, it simply does not register on their radar screens.

If anyone doubts that, all you need do is check the complete record of U.S. votes in the U.N. on Arab-Israeli issues, or relevant votes in Congress. Moreover, in my opinion, Iran's interests are also quite distinct and much broader than the Arab-Israeli conflict. To harp on variations on that theme actually undermines our ability to bring about change in U.S. policy toward Iran.

Yes, most of us (myself included) are indeed Muslims, but did the fact that most Arabs are also Muslims prevent the Egyptians, Saudis, Kuwaitis, the other GCC countries, Palestinians (yes, the same Palestinians that are now the targets of the IRI's support) and Jordanians from helping Saddam? I would suggest that there are limits to how far Iran should go to defend the Palestinians at direct expense to its own interests.

And frankly, the Arab states are a greater direct threat to both Iran and Israel, than Iran and Israel are to each other. In addition, there are much more compelling issues with which to sway American audiences that we need to focus on and inject into the debate on U.S.-Iranian relations:containing Saddam, stemming the flow of narcotics across Southwest Asia, bringing about stability to Transcaucasia and Central Asia, blunting the Taliban's advances, helping to moderate the Pakistani-Indian arms race, protecting the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf, and helping the oil to flow from the Caspian Sea region outside Russian control.

Second, I fail to see how Mr. Mohammadi can arrive at the conclusion that I prefer "silence and inactivity in the face of Israeli abuses." I distinctly recall saying the following: "Of course, Israel's short history is replete with examples of hypocrisy, excesses in the name of state preservation, and discrimination bordering on communal terrorism. There is no question about that." I believe that is self-explanatory.

Mr. Mohammadi raised very interesting issues in his original piece ["Ghost of Khobar"]. I simply tried to illustrate how difficult it is to translate his well-intentioned work into something that would actually cause action inside the Beltway today.

I applaud and encourage all those within the Iranian-American community that are active and involved in furthering the cause of the normalization of U.S.-Iranian relations; it is in all our interests, as Iranian-Americans and members of the universal human community, that they succeed.

Bahram Rajaee

Comment for The Iranian letters section