Hello class. The topic for this week was, of course, President Ahmadinejad. You guys definitely have some strong opinions about him.
You will need to comment on Ahmadinejad's letter to Americans. The link to it is on the left, under the link menu.
Basically, as an American, or at least someone who currently resides here, what is your reaction to this letter? What would you like to say to him as a reply?
Be sure to come up with some issues that came up this week in lecture.
Have a good break!
-Amir
28 comments:
A quick note Amir or Keyan, I had messed up my first posting as I had accidentally posted in my own personal blog page, as opposed to making a comment on the posts that you had up...so I just copied and pasted the post to the Revolution post, if you want to check it out and give me credit :)
Alright, in any case, I do share similar sentiments that President Ahmadinejad conveyed in his letter to the Americans. I believe he makes some great points and I agree with most of what he said. At the same time, it's very difficult to take any man's word too seriously, whether it's President Ahmadinejad or President Bush.
I definitely believe that our government and media keeps a lot of the truth from the American people and chooses to focus on a few insignificant headliners in an effort to keep the people at ease and protected. After all, I do believe that the majority of our population will listen to what the media and administration is telling them without any skepticism, and this ultimately prevents any uprisings or protests from occurring. With that being said, I do agree with what Ahmadinejad said about the US administration constantly lying to its people convincing them that there is a legitimate reason for many of its soldiers to fight and die in a war in Iraq.
At the same time, one has to take a step back and take into account the ultimate motives and interests for fighting in Iraq and for blindly supporting Israel in its fighting with the Palestinians. The US's main interest lies in maintaining an open market and for me, we could care less about how other countries are doing, but we only want them to do well so that we can maintain an open market where our economy will continue to prosper. With that being said, it's pretty obvious that our aid to Israel stems from the fact that Israel is our only ally in the Middle East and the only way for us to maintain our power and presence in the Middle East is to help out Israel. I believe Ahmadinejad understands this but realizes that it is wrong and also realizes that everything else that the US does in other countries as it relates to the intersts of the US is also wrong. I agree with Ahmadinejad in this respect and believe that the US should not go about things the way that they are, but I am also very doubtful that it will change. After all, we are a powerhouse and will continue to do what's in the country's best interests and since things have been running this way for a while now, i don't think it's going to change any time soon.
In the end, I think Ahmadinejad's letter provides an outside perspective of how others view the American government. At the least, it's very informative to see what others think from the outside and I think it may bring light for some readers to the fact that what the media and government tell us here in the US is very different from what others see on the other side of the equation.
I must admit that I am quite impressed with what Ahmadinejad had to say in his letter to America, even if it is a rhetorical political exercise with no real consequences in international affairs. He said that “The global position of the United States is in all probability weakened because the administration has continued to resort to force, to conceal the truth, and to mislead the American people about its policies and practices.” In many ways, I would say that he is right in his analysis that the Bush Administration is doing more to hurt the United States’ reputation internationally than help it, and the administration’s efforts are completely counteracting any progresses that they would like to be making on the “war” against terrorism.
I think that Ahmadinejad is right to bring up Abu Ghraib, the CIA interrogation practices, and the cases of extraordinary rendition of suspected terrorists around the world to “black sites” without trial, lawyer, and due process. I also think that these things—coupled with the war in Iraq and an endless “war” against terrorism—are degrading the United States reputation around the world, impeding and destroying the international rule of law.
Even though I do not agree or think that everything that Ahmadinejad has said is true or even rational, I find it interesting and refreshing to hear a relevant critique from someone who on the face of things does not seem to have a lot in common with my upbringing or worldview.
I believe that Ahmandinejad's thoughts are generally well-based and excellently articulated, but because I have little knowledge of all the occurances in the middle-east (dealing with Israel), I find it hard to accept everything he says at face value. He makes excellent points about both country's moral framework, and how the US has relied on its muscle to receive outcomes in its favor. Better put by him, "The legitimacy, power and influence of a government do not emanate from its arsenals of tanks, fighter aircrafts, missiles or nuclear weapons. Legitimacy and influence reside in sound logic, quest for justice and compassion and empathy for all humanity." This perfectly contrasts the U.S's actions and its ideology.
Although I agree with the aformentioned points, I find his comments towards Israel to be a bit too...aggressive to coincide with his ideologies of peace. His anger is understandable, but this only adds to what can be assumed is a bias he has against the country. He describes Israel's actions in a way that begs to bring up the question: Why would they do such a thing? In that respect, I feel that there are facts that have been omitted and the issue isn't as simple as he makes it to be.
Q: Basically, as an American, or at least someone who currently resides here, what is your reaction to this letter? What would you like to say to him as a reply?
A: In a way, I feel as if Ahmadinejad is trying to seem as someone he is not. I noticed that his letter is addressed to the people, with whom he seems to side with. However, he does criticize the US Administration as the root of all the problems affecting US-Iran relations. He plays on US terrorist policies by inverting the title of the true terrorist (the US as he claims) and makes mentions of the US-supported Zionist movement as causing terror to the Palestinian people. Ahmadinejad, refering to the Zionists, writes, "In broad day-light...they are bombarding innocent defenseless civilians, bulldozing houses, firing machine guns at students in the streets and alleys, and subjecting their families to endless grief". As an American reading this letter, I believed there was some validity to his argument. However, Ahmadinejad falls short in mentioning the atrocities committed by his own country, Iran. Most of these actions can be attributed to the Islamic regime that has, since 1979, blocked an attempt, to what I believe was a move towards democracy, by the Shah.
I feel that my responses to Ahmadeinejad's post may be a bit biased after the videos we saw in class. I feel this way because upon seeing the videos the stereotypes and misconceptions I had about Iranian politics were ramified. I feel that in America we are propelled to feel that we are the definition of democracy. I feel that we are taught through the media, early education, and even our families that the United States is equal to 2 things; Democracy and Freedom. However, upon seeing the videos of both Ahmadinejad speak to University students in Iran, as well as Khameini's visit as well that perhaps our definition of democracy and the rights it implies are some what skewed. Although the messages that Khameini were sending to the University students may have been confusing and seemingly manipulative I believe he made a good point when he stated that the very proof of democracy ruling is evident in the ability of the students to openly degree with his rule. In one of the clips we watched Ahmadinejad walked into a University auditorium where he was booed and even photographs of him were being burned. Do we think that type of expression would have been tolerated at all if President Bush walked into an auditorium if his citizens burning his photograph? I highly doubt he would even put himself in a situation where any countering opinions to his own would be so vehemently displayed. More pertinent to this article, the President of Iran starts out by trying to draw connections between Iranian and American mentality in governance and foundation. However, I feel that in it's foundation it is like grasping at straws. There may have been similarities but what exists today is very different. President Clinton once said ' Why be an American if you can't criticize the President?" In a post 9-11 world it seemed a terrorist act in itself to not support the American President in what the President or Iran describes as the killing of innocent lives for reasons outside of just fighting terrorist activity. Perhaps as Ahmadeinejad states, there is an ongoing threat that nations should unify in aiding, but perhaps the first thing that needs to be done is re-evaluating the core systems and mis-education of a nation’s people about their own governance issues before setting out to change other systems that are viewed as flawed.
Q: Basically, as an American, or at least someone who currently resides here, what is your reaction to this letter? What would you like to say to him as a reply?
A. I was very surprised when I read this letter. And the lingering feeling I got from it left me with a slightly more complex opinion of Ahmadinejad than I had before.
My first reaction was one of confusion, and it arises primarily because his reasoning is surprising reasonable (though not on all matters, which I elaborate on further down). In this letter the image you get from him is very different from the one I got in class (which was mostly negative, due to the his politically incorrect – and extremely provocative - questioning of the Holocaust). In general I have a not very nuanced image of him as the “wicked man of the East”. The letter partly changed this.
That is not to say that I have a more positive view of him now. Rather, the view I got from reading his letter to the American people was that he is quite a talented politician, and this letter shows that he acts in a very strategic manner. To me it is obvious that he is catering to an the anti-Bush sentiment that was – and still is – so prevalent at the time of the writing of the letter, when the Democrats had won the majority in both the Senate and in the House. Most of his language and the examples he uses to articulate what he means are not very inflammatory, and are quite aligned with anti-Bush feelings. This analysis pertains to most of the letter, but not when he explains his views on Israel. Whether or not you agree with Ahmadinejad or on the Palestinian situation, I believe that his thoughts on Israel are in stark contrast to most of the other contents of this letter, and goes to show that the moderation of opinion that he shows on other issues is maybe just a way to strategically gain support for himself, and make him seem more reasonable than what he really is.
My blog posting is not really a reply to his letter, rather it turned out to be more a reflection and a reaction on the reasoning behind the letter. I do not really know how I would respond to a letter addressed to the American people, because even though I feel that I agree with some of his views I am fundamentally opposed to Ahmadinejad views in so many ways that I find it hard to take anything he says seriously. As I have stated above, I believe he acts as a strategic actor playing to the crowds of the moment, when he has opinions that I partly agree with. When he has opinions that I do not agree with, I want to dismiss him as irrational and unenlightened. I believe he is a much more complex figure than I give him credit for, and I am convinced that he is a strategic politician, who knows how to target an audience, with a message they – at least partly – can support.
Dear President Ahmadinejad,
Damn! You sound like you understand the American people, but, with all do respect, it seems to me your caught up in all your diplomatic jargon, as well as projecting your own wants, desires, and cultural understandings unto the American people. Let me educate you a little about our country.
First, why are you addressing us? Do you think we really care? Less than half of us vote. You said you told Bush that he better turn his act around, or voters will change their mind after the election, something with electorals, overturning, whatever, whatever, dude! We....presupposing and setting aside those of us who don't even vote, but we didn't vote for the douche in the first place! The election was rigged and the distrust and apathy in American democracy contends it to be anything but.
Ok, so Zionism. Why do we give support, millions, billions of dollars, guns, etc. (interesting fact, all the nuclear weapons were created at UC Berkeley) for Jews to torture Palestinians? Power baby. Money and power. Jews own the entertainment industry, are wealthy, affluent, etc, and are also white. America is by far the harshest, racist terrain ever. The lighter the skin, the more access to wealth, success, franchisement, etc.
Oh, and what's up with all the nations sharing fraternity? What about the other half of the population, women? Here in America, we at least pretend that women have equal rights.
It's creative of you to write a letter, addressed to me and the other American people, but in the future, try to separate God a little more in your letters. Know your audience better. America has separation of Church and State. Lots of us get pissed off when religious, or political control guised under the trope of religious/family values takes away our freedom.
Have a lovely day, send allah a prayer for me ;)
peace in the middle east
What this letter portrays more than anything else is Ahmadinejad’s hatred of Israel and the American government under Bush. The letter can at first be seen as an attempt to achieve two distinct aims, first, to drive Israel and the United States apart by demonstrating the nations’ fates as unconnected and second, to get American troops out of Iraq. Regarding the United State’s relationship with Israel, it is true that many Americans do not understand the “blind and blanket support” of their government for Israel. The truth of the matter is though, that Israel is the United States’ staunchest ally in the region and arguably the world. Israel does not lift a finger without United States approval and is a vital ally in combating terrorism throughout the Middle East. In appealing to the American people to cease supporting Israel, Ahmadinejad speaks volumes about his own vision for the Middle East. Support for Israel means support for true democracy, freedom of speech and expression, and combating terrorism. Ahmadinejad’s Iran reaches none of the aforementioned aims and is a place where the persecution of homosexuals, government censorship, and candidate restrictions for elected office reveal a reality quite different from the United State’s vision for the region. As much as Ahmadinejad tries to separate the goals and objectives of Israel and the United States the reality is such that the two nations’ objectives are one and the same. Furthermore, Ahmadinejad’s reference to the refugees who “have died in the Diaspora and in refugee camps” has nothing to do with Israel and is linked to the neglect of Arab states who refuse to admit Palestinians into their societies. His portrayal of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a one-sided issue further demonstrates this letter as a propaganda piece; highly inflammatory and generally inaccurate. Regarding the Iraq issue, Ahmadinejad is equally transparent. Trying to again exploit certain American sentiments – soldiers “separated from their families and loved ones” and spending “the billions of dollars…from your treasury” – shows that his primary goal is to undermine the government of the United States by stirring up popular discontent based on highly emotional and political issues. He even goes so far as to state that “the American people are not satisfied with [government] behavior” as evident from “the recent elections.” Connecting the Iraq issue to the wider war on terror he states that even “liberties in the United States are being increasingly curtailed” and that “due process and fundamental rights are trampled upon.” In each instance, Ahmadinejad’s attempted effort to undermine the legitimate government of the United States acts as a slap in the face for the American administration. The letter itself which addresses the American people as opposed to the United States government is at its core, just one of Ahmadinejad’s efforts to make the administration look bad, this time in front of its own citizens (similarly to when he visited Columbia University). Fortunately the American people stands united against oppression and will continue to work with Israel and other free and democratic states to promote true peace and justice in the world as opposed to the supposed “freedom, human dignity and integrity” that Ahmadinejad claims to provides in Iran.
See here or here
Q: Basically, as an American, or at least someone who currently resides here, what is your reaction to this letter? What would you like to say to him as a reply?
A: I think this letter is simply a piece of political rhetoric and should not be viewed as being anything else. The views expressed in this letter are hollow and, in my opinion, basically worthless. His claims that changing US policies in the way that he deems proper will make life better for all people when in fact this letter is an effort to rally support for his own nationalistic religious agenda. THIS LETTER EMBODIES THE VERY DEVIOUS AND DECEITFUL MOTIVES OF AMERICAN POLITICAL RHETORIC THAT IT CLAIMS TO DENOUNCE. This man cannot be trusted in the same way that most politicians cannot be trusted. In addition, he pulls examples of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict deeply out of context in an effort to demonize the Jews that reside there. He completely neglects all aggression directed at Israeli's from Palestinians. I am of course not surprised by this, I am simply pointing it out.
I see that many of the postings to this letter are actually favorable responses to contents. I say, it all depends on what side of the aisle you sit on, no one is better than anyone else. If you dont like Jews or Israel you would probably agree with Ahmadinejad if you do, you probably wont. Thats about it.....
I would say to him, quit sending me your spam mail
The many faces of President Ahmadinejad makes it hard for an American to wrap his head around the man and the country. There's first the perception of Ahmadinejad as a satanic second-coming, a religious zealot hellbent on exterminating the state of Israel. Of course, such a caricature tends to wear pretty thin outside the hermetically-sealed world of American cable television. Then there's the Ahmadinejad of the letter-a calculated political manuever with clear objectives pursued with less clarity. The letter itself reads like an attempt to appeal to the very hearts of the American people while categorically denouncing the government's actions. Eventually, the letter seems to devolve into an attempt to frame American predisposition to human rights and rationality as congruent to Ahmadinejad's desires. In that respect, the letter clearly has veiled layers, but its in the margins of the subterfuge that popular opinion is shaped. Clearly the dichotomy is framed from both sides and hopefully reconciliation can eventually produce some sort of dialogue neccesary for a more peaceful and prosperous co-existence.
I don't understand why people call this man an idiot. He is obviously very intelligent. Everything he said is true and I'm sure many people who read will feel that the things he says make a lot of sense. He understands that by stating these truths he can gain sympathy. While reading it I found myself sympathizing with him. However, I can not ignore the fact that he mentions humanitarian values that the Iranian administration has not succeeded in maintaining, especially in regards to women.
What I do wish people would realize is that although it seems ridiculous that the President of Iran would preach to the American Administration about its lack of fair treatment to its citizens, it is just as ridiculous from the point of view of Iran and other countries when America condemns them for undemocratic and inhumane practices that our government has been discovered to enforce.
I don't understand why people call this man an idiot. He is obviously very intelligent. Everything he said is true and I'm sure many people who read will feel that the things he says make a lot of sense. He understands that by stating these truths he can gain sympathy. While reading it I found myself sympathizing with him. However, I can not ignore the fact that he mentions humanitarian values that the Iranian administration has not succeeded in maintaining, especially in regards to women.
What I do wish people would realize is that although it seems ridiculous that the President of Iran would preach to the American Administration about its lack of fair treatment to its citizens, it is just as ridiculous from the point of view of Iran and other countries when America condemns them for undemocratic and inhumane practices that our government has been discovered to enforce.
Ahmadinejad's letter seems to be a tool he is using to change the unfavorable image of himself and his country that has been portrayed in the US media. He expressly addresses the American people, attempting to create a tone that is more friendly than political. In addition, he establishes values that are shared by both cultures. It is impressive that he speaks positively about the American people amidst all the hostility between the US and Iran; however, it is evident that there is a set of motives behind this amicability. While reading the letter, I felt that Ahmadinejad was trying to depict Bush's administration as the common enemy of Iranians and Americans. He highlights actions taken by the administration that Americans clearly do not approve of in order to create legitimacy for his political agenda. While I agree with many of his thoughts, his opinions on Israel and Zionism are controversial and unfair, in my view. His questioning of the Holocaust is offensive and ineffective in proving his arguments about Israel. At the same time, it is important to consider Ahmadinejad's background because it provides some explanation as to why he feels so strongly about this issue. As we discussed in class, Ahmadinejad is a veteran of the Iran-Iraq War--a battle which Iran fought without any support from other countries. Therefore, it is understandable that he would feel angry about the US providing aid to Israel.
Whether Americans agree or disagree with Ahmadinejad, his letter is important because it reveals his perspective on some important issues. In the US, we often have a perception of Iran as a terrorist country in the "axis of evil" and this letter aims at changing that image.
With apologies for the belated response, I would like to approach President Ahmadinejad’s letter addressed to the American people in a way that allows me to analyze its rhetorical aspects. In doing so, I may be able to decipher not only what is explicit in the address, but also its implications. On the surface, I believe that President Ahmadinejad attempts to create a sense of empathy between himself and the American people: “…we have common concerns, face similar challenges, and are pained by the sufferings and afflictions in the world.” In doing so, he antagonizes the current heads of our government, already unpopular among Americans, while drawing a clear distinction between America’s government and its people. This serves two pragmatic purposes: it allows him to praise the “noble” American constituency, while also permitting him to deride its corrupt and coercive government. I, however, find his praise of the American people’s ideals to be almost insulting and somewhat condescending. He is ostensibly flattering the American people by intermittently inserting phrases and terms of praise. However, I believe that he is utilizing the general international sentiment that Americans are egoistic; in stroking our egos, he is hoping to win our sympathy.
In addition, he does not refrain from bringing religious issues to the forefront of his speech: “Both our nations are God-fearing, truth-loving and justice-seeking, and both seek dignity, respect and perfection.” In numerous instances, Ahmadinejad presents religion and God as a basis for understanding and mutual experience between the American and Iranian people, when religion has ubiquitously been cited as a source of abrasion between the Middle-East and the West. The strongly religious tilt of his address, however, may serve to do his argument more harm than good. Though most Americans are “God-fearing,” what I interpret as a belief in an omnipotent God, American politics are contemporarily held in a secular arena.
President Ahmadinejad attempts to appeal to the American public’s pathos in a letter that, in large part, conveys an anti-Zionistic sentiment. He cannot come out and say the things he says in his letter regarding the injustices committed against Palestinians without seeming to be the racist that he has been portrayed as in the media. He, therefore, tries to mitigate the potential damages that will almost inevitably occur in a blatant display of sycophancy towards the American people; this is the only way in which, given his established reputation, he may be heard and taken seriously.
I think that for the most part the letter is very well written. However, as an American, I feel like it also was patronizing. The reality is that I don't know enough about the specifics of the Palestinian situation to determine whether or not his statements are accurate. However, I also got the clear idea that he wasn't trying to educate so much as bash the Zionists all together. That said, somewhere underneath the religious hyperbole there were some very good points regarding the overall United States foreign policy in the Middle East. One of my favorite parts is "Legitimacy and influence reside in sound logic, quest for justice and compassion and empathy for all humanity. The global position of the United States is in all probability weakened because the administration has continued to resort to force, to conceal the truth, and to mislead the American people about its policies and practices." This letter continues to showcase his style of politics as discussed in class. Specifically he seems to focus on making anti-zionist statements while masking them with the desire for a new educational discourse. I also can see how making these kinds of statements are important to understanding how things can be viewed from the other side. As westerners, I think there is a tendency to distort the story in favor of Israel. I think this letter is doing the same for Palestine but with some great commentary on foreign policy included.
Ahmadinejad's letter raises some interesting issues. I agree with what some say that it is quite similar to the very rhetoric Ahmadinejad criticizes in his letter.
But, as one of my fellow students wondered, he doesn't admit to his own "mistakes" or "misdeeds." But really, what public leader admits to his mistakes publicly? It rarely happens and only in grave circumstances. It's always a rationalization for one's actions and beliefs, which I believe this letter to be.
Although parts of this letter I may agree with and parts I may not, this letter definitely humanizes a person whom previously I had only seen demonized.
But nevertheless, again, it is all rhetoric which is used to protect one's own beliefs and attack opposing beliefs. Ahmadinejad provides a written attack on the American government which is attacking the Iranian government. Although there may be truth to either side's argument, there are also incongruencies in each, there are omissions of admitting one's own missteps while happily pointing out others.
What I do appreciate is that we are constantly bombarded with all of the Iranian governments mistakes and misdeeds, but it doesn't seem that other governments are nearly as prolific in their criticisms, especially not of the U.S. So it is almost refreshing to hear this rhetoric aimed at the US and not from the mouth of President Bush. Although this rhetoric is tiring at times, this letter is a view that I don't often see expressed in the political arena.
So my first reaction to "letter to america" is, thank god. The american media does such an incredibly good job of presenting the split between terrorist-fearing democrats and war-mongering republicans as being the fundamental divide amongst us (thereby rendering invisible those of us who don't support the war in iraq, etc.), that I am impressed anyone outside the country would think there would be an audience-base large enough to receive such a letter. Whether ahmadinejad actually believes that many americans are against the bush administration and the war, or whether he hopes to play on sentiments of dearly held american values such as liberty, democracy and fear of god, is unclear to me. The religious rhetoric is not extremely persuasive, but i think the letter does an extremely good job of quietly striking at the heart of americans' fear of terrorism as created by our government. The idea that middle easterners' mentalities and ours are so fundamentally opposed around different values(allah, 100 virgins upon a suicidal death, irrational hatred of US "freedoms" v. liberty, christianity, women's rights, democracy) is pushed to the side as he emphasizes lost childhood, motherly love, and benevolence as common characteristics amongst americans and iranians.
Interestingly I feel like he is using almost a Christian rhetoric of salvation in his letter; renounce your president and you can still be saved/a decent human being. I find it admirable that another country would be so forgiving of a people who tout democracy as they wage war, but don't errupt in riots when it becomes public knowledge that their own elections are fraudulent. I honestly wonder what the reaction of the general public to this letter would be. Katrina was definitely a wake up call to many i think that US government cares about none but itself, and corporate profits. Still, I wonder if Americans can make the link between atrocities that occur to americans and those Bush inflicts upon other countries. A Loiusiana senator said, regarding New Orleans after Katrina, that they had been trying to "clean up" public housing in the area for years, and that the hurricane and GOD did what they couldn't; this separation and racist mentality is what drives US hegemony i believe, the idea that any one not white or wealthy is in opposition to our government as "other".
I am not so sure that referencing other instances of US invasion and intervention helped his case either. Although there was eventual popular support to the anti-war movement in vietnam, i certainly doesn't seem like most americans today regard our past foreign policy as anything other than necessary; i wonder if touching on issues outside of this conflict made him more or less convincing.
i also wonder what a letter drafted by native iranians to native US citizens and residents would look like. In the same way that Bush used the supposed sentiment of the Iraqi people as partial-justification for ferreting out Sadam Husein, I wonder as to the benevolence of Ahmadinejad toward the american people. In light of the Iran Irag war we see that countries at war use all the tricks in the bag from chemical weapons provided by the use to child armies.
I would not disagree with his analysis of Israel and the damage it is inflicting in the middle east, but the video we watched questioning the holocaust was frightening. There is no doubt that the extermination of jews in the holocaust is a sacred cow for most of the west, and a metaphorical black box, but it REALLY wouldn't have been that hard to present the conference as a reexamination of historical events rather than a denial of genocide. Attempting to arouse american sympathy through certain acts of pain while denying others seems...well, i guess just like any other politician.
i believe that though ahmadinejad makes some excellently articulated and well thought out points in his letter to the US, the media and the administration will find a way to mangle and distort his words. besides, this letter is a translation from a language that does not always translate gracefully to english. and also, how many people choose to actually read the letter? when the letter was sent to the bush administration i had a very difficult time finding a transcript of the letter or a translation. most of what was available were editorials and synopses on the topic. whenever mentioned in the media, 90% of the articles are dedicated to bashing ahmadinejad for denying the existence of the holocaust and saying that "israel should be wiped off the map." so there is not much room for the american people to have their own opinion about ahmadinejad's commentary. it was not often mentioned in the media that this was the first correspondence between the two nations for over 2 decades- a brave move on ahmadinejad's part. i really agree with some of his points about the bush administration disregard for proper tactics on the world stage. but since the media has repeatedly undermined ahamadinejad's credibility, it is unlikely that anything he says will be absorbed by the american people.
I am quite impressed with what Ahmadinejad had to say. I believe that he has nothing but hopes and dreams for a stable middle east and good relations with the United States. He wished America well and told it how it is. He stated that for the most past Iranians in the United States are good citizens and contribute to society.
His comments on Zionist are very true as well. His view on Iraq is about right as well. There has been and increase in terrorism activities and provoked young kids to turn to violence. Abu Ghraib and Cia operations have kept the american people in the dark and there is no excuse for that.
After reading this surprisingly eloquent message I felt a strong sense of compassion and desire to fix the problems that he noted. On the other hand, he used beautiful rhetoric in order to move the people to act according to his will. I believe the things Ahmadinejad was saying were mostly universal truths that could not be argued against. His points were made to appeal to the readers pathos.
One point that I thought was very biased and the main point he was trying to make as about Palestine. I believe everything he said about the Palestinians and how they deserve to have a place to call their home and not be constantly in fear of their lives. But I also believe that it is in the Israeli right to have the same privileges of having peace, in this lies the problem. With both sides equally human and equally deserving to live in a safe and peaceful environment it is hard to decide how to change the situation in order to favor both sides. Ahmedinejad seems to only want to favor the Palestinians which seems to go against what he was previously stating about humanity. I believe that this letter was very well written and it even gave me a goosebumps but I cannot say that it was perfectly just.
This letter from President Ahmadinejad to the "People of the United States," as well as his desire to give a speech last year to students at Columbia University just strike me as misplaced and unneccesary.
If President Ahmadinejad or the Iranian Public Relations Dept feel it so necessary to defend any particular policies they are implementing to the American people, they should first start with the people of their own country where Ahmadinejad's government is increasingly gaining in unpopularity. Dialogue between nations should always be encouraged, but through the proper channels...through student exchanges, commerce, tourism, while leaders of countries should focus on bringing peace, prosperity and stability to their citizens, which is the exact opposite of what this president has done for his people.
The majority of what the letter mentioned I believe was true, granted, but as an American, I would just prefer to be presented with an expose on the miscomings of my nation from somebody who is not devoted to maintaining complete instability and economic hardship in the middle east for however long it takes to reach their ultimate goals,(whatever those may be,) and to not be lectured on our use of torture (what i believe to be the worst blow overseas however to our nation's credibility and image) by a government that allows stoning for the use of punishment and execution for homosexuality.
Ahmadinejad wants to establish a good relationship with the people of the United States though his letter. In his letter he makes many good points but it is really difficult to take him seriously since he does not follow the advice he has given. When I read his letter to America, the first thing that came to mind was "look who's talking". However some good points that he made in his letter include him questioning whether terrorism can be defeated by traditional warfare. "If that were possible, then why has the problem not been resolved?". The letter he wrote was well written in many aspects and made an American reader feel sympathetic towards him. Ahmadinejad has a reputation of being rather foolish and unintelligent. Reading this letter made me realize that he is in fact very smart and deceitful. Actions speak louder than words and who is he to tell Americans what to do. He makes many valid points encouraging peace and democracy; However he does not practice this in his own country. The tone of his letter makes it seem as if he actually cares about Americans like a "father" and he tries to advise them. Though many of his points are valid, I don't want to hear an incompetent president who can barely run his own country telling me how I want my tax money spent. I agree with almost everything he has to say and was shocked to read how clearly he can portray his ideas, but as I was reading the letter, I could not help but think the number of people that must have proofread his letter before sending it to the States. Had I not had any background knowledge of Ahmadinejad I would have taken his side up until the last few paragraphs of the letter. At the very end of the letter he brings God and religion into play and that is when I could not take the letter seriously. All the good points he made went to waste. As an American I am used to the separation of state and religion (for the most part) and don't want to hear a political leader talking about God.
I felt Ahmadinejad's letter to be suffused with a notion of inherent goodness in all human beings and a cohersive draw on people's conceptions of their own goodness and innocence. Ahmadinejad seems to be trying to display a sort of purity of purpose (of Iran and Ahmadinejad's gov't) in this letter. It felt a bit superficial to me.
I agree with some of his arguments, some of his questions I have wondered myself. For instance, he asks, "can terrorism be contained and eradicated through war, destruction and the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocents?" and he later on suggests that perhaps the US's violence has only encouraged more terrorism. That was a question certainly reminiscent with my own thoughts and doubts. On the other hand, this question of his also called upon my own cynicism toward his leadership and the history of human rights violations in Iran as well as in governments around the world. No government is innocent of corruption and violence.
Overall, I find his letter to be simplistic and idealistic. I do find some statements compelling and believable, for example, "The US administration does not accept accountability before any organization, institution or council. The US administration has undermined the credibility of international organizations, particularly the United Nations and its Security Council."
But overall I dont find his letter very helpful or effective in any way. I think the American people, certainly myself, have become for whatever reason disenchanted with the political system in the US and apathetic perhaps about our ability as the Americans to make change or effectively respond to the Bush administration.
So, I guess I dont feel this letter has done anything to change the situation and is a bit too idealistic and 'innocent' to serve any practical purpose either...
After reading Ahmadinejad's letter to the American people I was swayed in my inital impression of Ahmadinejad as being an unintelligent man. He appears to have fairly extensive knowledge about foreign politics and how to manipulate language. He evokes a lot of things that US politicians use in their rhetoric such as the evokation of the American People as an almost holy entity and the reference to God. In this last sense my comparative government professor drew parallels between the current US administration and Ahmadinejad. The United States technically, and i think should, have seperation of church and state but it seems that lately these lines have been blurred. I felt that Ahmadinejad did a good job appealing to the american people and drawing parallels in an attempt to close cultural gaps and prejudices ie talking about mothers grieving over dead children etc. He uses US rhetoric to his advantage in showing the ills of current foreign affairs issues. In general I agreed with what Ahmadinejad had to say but like one would expect it was not a very complete argument. It is somewhat difficult to heed the concerns about human rights from a regime that is portrayed as being unjust and ambiguous in its treatment of its citizens. This aside he brings up some good points but I think that many people may have discredited them because of his position and portayal in American media. I was astonished at the way he was disrespected at his visit to Colombia. Maybe it wasn't the most intelligent thing for him to have gone in the first place following his comments about Israel and the Holocaust but still...he should have been allowed to defend himself and share his viewpoint and engage in more progressive debate/difficult question and answer session. I am not sayint that I agree with his politics but I also don't think that Iran was the axis of evil...unless we force them to live up to that... I don't recall having read this letter to the American people before and I wonder what media sources talked about it, who read it, and how Washington dealt with it, if at all??
Ahmadinejad strategically begins his letter to Americans by pulling out commonalities that signify humanity and a shared value system. I think this was a very important move for the Iranian president; he needed to show Americans that their people all want similar things for their families and their country. As we’ve seen from the readings, lectures and videos the Iranian government has been portrayed as an evil, human rights violating potential terrorist regime, but, in this letter President Ahmadinejad begins to speak to ill actions of the current US administration. The US government has supported Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine and the daily dehumanization of Palestinians through out the Diaspora, invaded a country based on lies and continues to cause instability throughout the region and most of the Third World. The media within the United States is extremely biased and Americans would rather know what Britney Spears is doing rather than care about how their country is taking billions of dollars of our tax money (which could be used to support universal health care, strengthen our educational system and other social services) to murder, displace and bomb innocent people. While acknowledging that people are oppressed all over the world every second of the day I am in no way excusing it, we must realize that there is a long history behind us which has created the current imbalance of power and divisions which has resulted in prejudice, injustices and violence. Ahmadinejad is shining the light on the US because they claim to be the leaders of the world and because they believe that it’s their duty to spread democracy and fight terror, but they too have done wrong. In response to Ahmadinejad’s letter I would begin by recognizing that both our governments have oppressed our citizens but then I would want to go on and begin to discuss possible solutions which would attempt to mend a dysfunctional relationship between two great countries.
For a message addressed to a country whose constitution separates church and state, I believe Ahmadinejad incorporates too many religious references in his letter. In all honesty, I agree with most of the content in his letter, but the way he presents some of his main points seems less persuasive as other approaches may have been. He addresses Zionist support and the Iraq war multiple times, making clear stances on both issues. Throughout the entire letter, he states his disapproval of U.S. intervention and foreign relations, even making a point that "the US administration has undermined the credibility of international organizations, particularly the United Nations and its Security Council". This distrust of U.S. foreign policy makes up a large portion of the letter, however, the point I found most interesting in the letter was the distinction Ahmadinejad made between the American public and American politicians. Ahmadinejad prefaced the international distrust of the United States with the American people's distrust of Washington. This appeared multiple times throughout the letter, and seemed to validate (along with international conflicts such as the Iraq war and military aid to Israel) Iranian distrust of the U.S.
In addition to the religious references, I believe Ahmadinejad's intentions to connect the U.S. to Iran by claiming "both greatly value and readily embrace the promotion of human ideals such as compassion, empathy, respect for the rights of human beings, securing justice and equity, and defending the innocent and the weak against oppressors and bullies" is essentially ineffective. The United States has a much different perspective of what human rights, empathy, justice and equity mean than Iran. The definitions of those terms is not universal. Defending the innocent and the weak against oppressors and bullies does not entail the same meaning in Iran as in the United States. By using such terms to forge a connection between two disparate countries, Ahmadinejad loses the effect of his argument.
As an American, I would express gratitude for the president's suggestion for a common dialogue between the US and Iran. Since the US snubbed the international community and commenced on a "my way or the high way" path of politics, it has done nothing but lose face and power in the international environment. As presidential hopeful Barrack Obama is expounding, we need to talk to even those countries whom we oppose, and the willingness which Ahmadinejad shows toward doing so is a good sign.
Furthermore, though I find the presidents condemnation of terrorism to be good, I recognize his hypocrisy. Because, as far as I understand, Iran does sponsor Palestinian organizations who are responsible for terrorism (groups like Hamas are responsible for innocent deaths, which is true whether you agree or disagree with what Israel is doing). Furthermore, Ahmadinejad harps upon the promotion of human dignity, respect for humanity, etc. despite the fact that his government has become notorious for human rights violations- that is imprisonment of dissidents, violent executions, etc. Though I like the ideas that he puts forth, everyone knows not even his state abides by them fully.
I was also surprised at how savvy he was to what is going on in our country, and how he tactfully he tied the America's woes with what we are doing overseas- "As you know very well, many victims of Katrina continue to suffer, and countless Americans continue to live in poverty and homelessness." That was pretty solid.
Post a Comment