Opinion * FAQ * Write for The Iranian
* Editorial policy

Understanding outrage
Blame does not solve any problems

By Amir
August 27, 2001
The Iranian

The recent discussion surrounding the hot topic of war and peace in the Middle East has not only shown us why the peace process has stalled, but also where Iranians in general stand and why. As it is apparent from the majority of opinions and letters, Iranians have a great degree of animosity towards Israel for a variety of reasons, founded or otherwise.

Furthermore, as emotions run high, there is ample evidence provided for the fears and insecurities that both sides of the political divide feel, in effect justifying all defensive aggressions. We have come to accuse, judge, convict and in some letters out-right threaten Israel with nuclear warfare that by all accounts we don't yet posses.

Little wonder that the other side should feel worried and hide behind even bigger walls (and geographically strategic places such as the Golan Heights) and feel more aggressive in this insecurity.

While many have genuinely tried to lay bare all the difficulty and the pain and suffering they themselves have experienced or seen on TV and read about on the internet, the more accusatory and outraged letters are also very telling, not only of the reasons for their emotional positions, but as justification for their adversaries' violence.

At times they have even sided for the breakdown of communication and talks and demonstrated how the cycle of violence can so easily spin out of control even by those who do not live within that violent environment day in and day out. It is very easy to understand the degree of outrage that leads to killing of not only fellow human beings, but also the bomber himself. Many are clearly at the end of their tethers and the letters sent to this magazine only testify to this.

We have demonstrated our willingness to propagate all sorts of conspiracy theories accusing Israel now of monitoring our communications (in a public forum such as the world wide web) -- whenever an attempt at dialogue is made -- and of wanting to extend their territories all the way to the Iranian plateau. No doubt there are similar defensive-aggressive discussions on the other side as well. Whenever someone speaks about (for)giving and peace, those who are excited by war and domination shoot him down. Remember Prime Minister Rabin?

Communication and discourse can simply not take place without some degree of friendliness, and a show of good faith. And this will not be achieved through the repetition of age old differences and animosity.

It is in that light that I have written for, and continue to advocate friendly engagement, and against an emotional search for someone to blame. In this, there is of course no argument whenever one side or the other points out the other's atrocities or tries to show the baselessness of these acts of violence. There is no winnable war; and there is no emotional logic.

It is good to see that some of the more responsible third parties try and reinitiate dialogue. In this, no matter how hopeless this anger and violence may seem, the efforts of Aussenminister Fischer of Germany is admirable. And if you excuse my taking his words slightly out of context, I think President Khatami of Iran is also on to something when he advocates a "dialogue of civilizations".

I am not advocating agreement with atrocities that go on in the world. But at the same time punishing these atrocities and trying to achieve justice through payback would only lead to furthering of violence. There is nothing good or evil in itself, and people do things because of their fears and mistrusts.

These factors can be traced in a person's life or a nation's history. And at the end of the day, blame does not solve any problems. There is no question that the abused abuse ad infinitum. To suggest otherwise is to essentially accuse a group of being evil, and this is what leads to conclusions such as the "Endloesung", or the "Final Solution" to the question of Jewry in Europe as decided by the Nazis.

But to come back to the national interests of Iran: clearly peace in the Middle East -- no matter who threw the first stone and who is responsible for the big bang -- could be the only real interest in relation to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Apart from that, Iran has not been able to play a major role either for or against the interests of United States, Nazi Germany, or the other major superpowers. The only country Iran is a serious threat to is Iran itself through her unsound political positions.

Comment for The Iranian letters section
Comment for the writer Amir


Just wondering
Is Israel a threat to Iran?
By Jahanshah Javid

It is our business
Palestine has historically affected us
By Kamran D. Rastegar

Siyaasate vaaqebinaaneh
Realistic (Iranian) view of the Arab-Israeli conflict
By Jan Shiraz

Friendly stance
Friendship with Israel could have benefits
By Amir

Simple logic
We should not be blind to Israel's ambitions
By Babak Sani

Israel-Turkey vs. Iran-Pakistan
By Zachary Latif

Think wider
Iran and Israel: Tribalism
By Moji Agha

By Amir

Friendly stance
Friendship with Israel could have benefits
By Amir

Hint of fear
Comparing the Taliban to feminism is really imaginative

Making light of pain
Being vicious beyond good and evil


* Recent

* Cover stories

* Feature writers

* All sections

Flower delivery in Iran
Copyright © All Rights Reserved. Legal Terms for more information contact:
Web design by BTC Consultants
Internet server Global Publishing Group