Twenty years ago, Harvard's Joseph Nye famously coined the term "soft power" to describe what he saw as an increasingly important factor in international politics -- the capacity of "getting others to want what you want," which he contrasted with the ability to coerce others through the exercise of "hard" military and/or economic power. The question of soft power, when it comes to Iran, is contentious. Most analysts seem prepared to acknowledge that the Islamic Republic's soft power in the Middle East rose significantly in the first several years of this decade. But many Western analysts now argue that Tehran's regional soft power has declined over the last couple of years, following the election of Barack Obama as president of the United States, the fallout from the Islamic Republic's June 2009 presidential election, and the imposition of new sanctions against Iran over its nuclear activities.
Others -- including the two of us -- argue that Iranian soft power remains strategically significant and is perhaps even still growing. In this regard, we are struck by two developments today. First, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad traveled to Beirut -- the first visit by an Iranian president to the Lebanese capital since President Mohammad Khatami went there in 2003. Although White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the visit demonstrated that Ahmadinejad was continuing his "provocative ways" and that Hezbollah "values its allegiance to Iran over its allegiance to Lebanon," the Iranian president received what the Christian Science Monitor's Nicholas Blanford described as a "rapturous" welcome from tens of thousands of Lebanese who turned out to greet him on his drive into Beirut from the airport. We include striking photographs of Ahmadinejad's reception in Beirut today on www.RaceForIran.com.
During his trip to Lebanon, Ahmadinejad is scheduled to visit Dahiya, a heavily Shi'a southern suburb of Beirut, and tour southern Lebanon. We would anticipate strongly positive and enthusiastic reactions from populations in both settings. As Rami Khouri aptly put it today (see here, in the Daily Star):
If Ahmadinejad, as planned, goes to south Lebanon and visits Hizbullah-controlled villages near the Israeli border, we should expect political emotions to go through the roof in both the pro-Iranian and anti-Iranian camps. This will not be a surprise, because Ahmadinejad overlooking the northern border of Israel in the company of his Hizbullah allies is a nightmare for most Israelis and many of their friends in the West, while for Hizbullah and its allies in the region this would be a prize-winning moment of defiance to be savored for a long time.
We do not believe that any Western leader -- or even any Arab leader -- could travel to Beirut today and move about in an open motorcade, as Ahmadinejad did, let alone do so and attract crowds of tens of thousands of eager well-wishers. Security concerns alone would preclude such a scenario. And this is the reality, even though the United States and its European and Arab allies have put significant sums of money and political capital into trying to consolidate a "pro-Western" political order in Lebanon.
If Iran today has substantial soft power in the Middle East -- as we believe it does -- it has that power in no small part because it has picked winners rather than losers as its allies in key regional theaters. Whether we speak of Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Palestine, or Shi'a Islamist parties in Iraq, Iran's regional allies are genuine political forces -- that is, forces that win elections because they represent important and unavoidable constituencies with legitimate grievances. And, in many cases, those allies engage in what their constituents believe is thoroughly laudable resistance against what those constituents see as America's (and Israel's) hegemonic ambitions in the Middle East. Again, Rami Khouri put it very well:
The United States and other Western powers are unhappy with the Iranian-Hizbullah link because these two parties represent an advanced form of indigenous Middle Eastern defiance of Western power, threats and sanctions. Western global powers are not used to having smaller Middle Eastern countries or movements ignore the orders or threats that emanate from Washington, London or other Western capitals. Lebanon has been a central test case of American support for the majority in the Lebanese government that confronts Hizbullah in some respects, so this visit represents a blow to Washington's strategy of bringing Lebanon firmly into its orbit.
Second, Colum Lynch, of the Washington Post and Foreign Policy, published an interesting piece today (see here) on the United Nations General Assembly's election of Germany, India, and South Africa to rotating seats on the UN Security Council. (It should be noted that, while Turkey will give up its rotating seat on the Security Council at the end of this year, Brazil will stay on the Council for another year.) As Lynch writes:
The election provides these emerging powers, all of whom aspire to become permanent members of the council, with an opportunity to show their stuff on the global stage. But it also poses a challenge to the United States. New members India and South Africa, as well as current member Brazil, differ sharply from the United States on everything from the use of economic sanctions to constrain Iran's nuclear program to the importance of human rights in international affairs. And they plan to be assertive about that opposition.
All of this underscores an important strategic point that we have been making for some time -- in relative terms, the United States is becoming less capable of achieving its stated policy objectives in the Middle East, and the Islamic Republic is becoming more capable of achieving its objectives. This reality should prompt a fundamental recasting of America's "grand strategy" in this critical part of the world.
Edward McClelland: Barack Obama As A Young Man
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/iran_marches_on_i8HO1PQZDJcWA2JirCfYVM?sms_ss=facebook&at_xt=4cb7eecb098eacdc%2C0#ixzz12PNAx6qG
http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/2636.htm
This recent video from him does not have propaganda as your video does.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d76xPez4OBw&feature=player_embedded
like Israel has? Does Iran have concentration camps like Israel has Gaza
Concentration Camps? Does Iran have a system of apartheid as Israel does in West
Bank? Does Iran have an unregulated nuclear stockpile like Israel does? Does
Iran execute Americans like Israel does? Does Iran commit countless war crimes
as Israel does? Does Iran force citizens of Iran swear a racist oath like Israel
does? Does Iran murder humanitarians like Israel does? Does Iran launch cyber
attacks at any other country, like Israel does? Does Iran send three nuclear
armed submarines to Israel's doorstep, as Israel did with the three nuclear
armed submarines it has stationed off Iran's coast?”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qN3-2ON2F6c
P.s. Just in case anyone wanna try it, it's not so easy translating Hebro (live) to English, or even "record" it and translate it to English...or any other for that matter. Help anyone?
Correct link...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjJNVDXVSXU
Israel on the other hand has invaded and taken land from all its neighbors.
Every country in the Reagen fears and loathes Israel for a reason.
Who are you arguing with?
What "facts" are you talking about?
The reality is that Ahmadinejad gets plenty of cheering crowds inside Iran, too (and travels in even more open vehicles, with fewer securityguards, most of the time)
It is left wingers with no understanding of Iran like you who love AN. Iranians like me know the Islamic republic is a sham. With candidates "pre" selected and ballot boxes stuffed.
Don't bother telling me it happens here. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Do not overestimate the differences between Muslim sects again.
The external enemy has always united Muslim countries.
You want to see unity of Muslims, just take a look at Hajj Pilgrimage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwk0zl7Y9Yc
clout gained by intimidation and violence….. hey but who cares
Actually that is how the USA does it.
You need to actually read the article.
(Daily Star)
"As he has in the past, Ban called on Israel to cease its over-flights of Lebanese territory and expressed the hope that progress could soon be realized on Ghajar, the northern part of which is still occupied by Israel,” Nesirky said.
Israel persists to violate Lebanese airspace on a near-daily basis, either through reconnaissance planes and unmanned drones or by staging mock air raids over southern and central towns and villages. The National News Agency (NNA) reported Thursday that another Israeli breach of Lebanon’s borders had occurred."
For a country that "desires peace" they spend a lot of time and energy threatening to kill people and actually killing people.
This visit is championed by many since it shows that not everyone is so scare to meet and act accordingly without Americans approval. I believe in private the Americans agree!
The Americans and Israelis have majority of the Muslim leaders in the region in their back pocket, they are afraid, turncoat Sunni leaders who work with the Americans on one hand and hold MOU's with Israel on the other.
While the Sunni population from Morocco to Pakistan want to see their leaders return to the shari'ah, provide muscle and restore Islam back into their secular governments.
The Americans are livid at this meeting in public, I believe they cheer a Shi'ah bloc in private since if a spark can be created, this would create a needed diversion with pending Shi'ah and Sunni hostilities; and Israel and the Americans would be free to continue there genocidal campaign against the Palestinians.
I worry for the future and what will this visit mean? Since there are Shi'ah uprisings in particular in Saudi Arabia and Yemen, these Shi'ah factions cannot topple these turncoat governments and surely, the Sunni insurgents will not fall under Shi'ah leadership.
what greater proof does America and the West need . . . to show them their strategy is a dismal failure . . that continues to result in death and suffering . . . .
Yes I would say that they are a great role model. They have the cajones to stand on their own two feet not live on their knees like the rest of the USA"s client states.
The reality is that on a percentage basis, fewer Iranians believe that Ahmadinejad is not their democratically elected President than Americans believe that Obama is legally barred from being their democratically elected President.
I'd guess Cheney felt the same way.
It is absolutely true and the majority of the people in Arab, Muslim, and non-aligned countries believe that. Despite the fact, we call them terrorists because of the enormous Israeli and pro-Israeli influence in the US foreign and domestic policies.
Both are guilty. The only difference is the far larger scale of Israel's killings.
The signing of the MOEs, and the increase in regional trade (and the increase in multinational unified infrastructure) that Iran has been a major player in.
Amongst the MOEs and trade agreements that Ahmadinejad is signing during this trip is one on energy, and when you look at the network of interconnected electrical grids that Iran is part of, the electrical projects in other countries that Iran is a partner in, and that Iranian companies are building, you get a good understanding of how far Iran's 'soft power' spreads, and that Lebanon is on the verge of tieing itself into that network. More importantly, you realise that there is basically nothing the US can do to prevent that happening, nor can they prevent Palestine (either the dregs left over from carving Israel out of it, if the 'two state solution' becomes more than a slogan, or the whole thing if it doesn't) from following in the same footprints.
A lot of attention is paid to the 'power' that Iran's oil gives it over China, but that tends to be overhyped (China could fairly easily stop buying from Iran, and instead increase its buy from Saudi Arabia, but chooses not to because that would give SA real power over China). The power that that electric grid gives, on the other hand, should be hard to ignore, and yet it is.
What FP posted was not 'hyperbole' (a statement that exagerates for effect, but is at its heart truthful) but instead an entirely different kettle of fish.
Given that the heart of the statement is untrue, and intended to promote an untruth as reality, the correct word to describe what he said is 'propaganda'.
If Hezbollah is 'cleansing the Christians out of Lebanon', why did the majority of them vote for the Hezbollah led coalition in the last election?
BTW, I do remember Neda, but I also remember that a Basiji member carrying a gun on duty is a very rare thing, and I also know how rare it is for an armed man who has seen his fellows beaten to death by a mob to surrender without attempting to use his gun to get away, and how even rarer it is for such a man to be able to walk away from the mob without the intervention of anyone.
Do you remember Bessan, Mayar, and Aya?
this is not true