Stunt or Statesmanship? Ahmandinejad Goes to Ground Zero

This morning I was bombarded by a series of phone calls from the press. Breathlessly, they all asked how I felt about Ahmandinejad, the president of Iran, visiting Ground Zero.

Wasn't I outraged?

Didn't I want to protest such a flagrant act of disrespect by this world outcast toward one of our country's most sacred sites?

How could a "terrorist leader on the level of UBL" have the audacity to visit Ground Zero?

By the third call before 9 a.m. I was fairly irritated. Mostly because the only news show that has made any real effort to get the American people to better understand Iran is The Today Show, which sent Matt Lauer to Tehran last week. (Incidentally, we should all commend Today Show producers for that effort -- this was the best morning television programming that I have seen in years, largely because it was not about "reprogramming" Americans for yet another war.)

So, no, I wasn't angry that Ahmandinejad wanted to visit Ground Zero. I was angry, however, at the "pack mentality" of our leading journalists. I was also dismayed -- but not surprised -- at the similar mentality of our current crop of political officials and presidential candidates, several of whom provided the same predictable, politically-correct sound-bite: "We are OUTRAGED!"

What I would have preferred was some real statesmanship.

Real statesmanship would be a presidential candidate with the courage to encourage potentially dangerous, misinformed leaders like Ahmandinejad to visit Ground Zero, in the hopes that they might learn something.

Real statesmanship would mean proposing a new dialogue with Ahmandinejad and other Iranian leaders, searching for some common ground between America and Iran while there's still time to avert disaster.

Real statesmanship would not be intimidated by the O'Reillys and the Ann Coulters of the world. Real statesmanship would not view this kind of diplomacy as weak, but wise. Real statesmanship would not be based on knee-jerk reactions, but on long-term vision.

So far not one presidential candidate has seized the opportunity to do something "out of the box" and important on Iran -- like actually meeting Ahmandinejad at Ground Zero and challenging him to a real dialogue.

Can you get the visual? Extending hands like an olive branch -- saying to the world that it is high time for Iran and the U.S. to join together to end terrorism, root out rogue extremist groups, and combat the injustice that nurtures them? That would be bold action, not cheap, tough talk. It would show the world that we are strong and confident enough to deal directly and squarely with our enemies, inviting them to join these common battles.

Imagine Rudy or Hillary actually engaging Ahmandinejad in a dialogue at Ground Zero, asking him tough questions about what his real intentions are, explaining the pain that Ground Zero represents to Americans, and why we all must work together to root out terrorism.

Of course, if Ahmandinejad really wants to walk in freedom around the freest city in the world he should also be prepared to address to the legitimate concerns of Americans and the world. So, as a quid pro quo, real leaders (like Rudy and Hillary claim to be) should also demand that Ahmandinejad answer the following questions:

1. Will you continue to crack down on illegal drugs flowing out of Afghanistan? Would you be interested in collaborating with the U.S. in this?

2. How can we secure adequate UN inspections of your nuclear facilities? What guarantees are you willing to give the world about your nuclear intentions? Do you really not understand how concerned we are about them?

3. What role is Iran currently playing in Iraq? Are you aware that the military aid you've reportedly been providing may only be prolonging the U.S. presence?

4. What is the status of the half-dozen American citizens that Iran is holding under arrest? How soon can we secure their release? More generally, why does Iran hold so many political prisoners in its jails, and why is your government so reluctant to allow any real political opposition?

5. Just last week you reportedly stated that you "hated" Americans. Do you really feel that way? If so, why have you decided to visit a place that Americans hold dear in our hearts?

Would Ahmandinejad answer these questions truthfully? Probably not -- that's not what any political leaders have much practice at. But that is beside the point. The point is that there is a strong case to be said for looking the man directly in the eye, precisely at a place like Ground Zero, demanding answers to these questions, and demonstrating that we are also capable of answering his tough questions.

The fact is, people are transformed by visiting the open wound of Ground Zero. Perhaps it is naïve to hope for this when it comes to Ahmandinejad. By September 2007, however, we have come to understand a few things. We can no longer go it alone as a nation, when it comes to fighting terrorism and making our world a safer place. We need a global approach. This necessarily means talking to scoundrels, rogues, and unsavory characters that we don't like.

Maybe President Ahmandinejad's trip to Ground Zero could provide a first step toward forging a new relationship with Iran. Maybe not. But this is, after all, Ground Zero. To me, there could be no better place for the dialogue to begin.

(And, frankly, if it weren't for President Bush, this dialogue (and many others like it) might have commenced six years ago in the wake of 9/11. But then again I digress...)

Comments

[Honza]

Now theres a lady that has more sense than most in our government, more so the Bush establisment, maybe Geogie is afraid to get close to any Arab except his oil buddie, what's his name?

[nikto]

Ahmandinejad has often uttered,
over the last couple years,
many inflammatory statements
(anti-Israel, esp) that seemed
to fit right in with
the Neocons' playbook.

The Neos should welcome him with
open arms and make sure he's
safe as a baby in its
crub while he's here.

He's likely to make some wacko statement
once again that will be used to
Bu$hCo's and the Neo's advantage
(i.e. emotionally-tinged excuses
to attack Iran).

President Cheney and the Chimp are
drooling over attacking Iran and
starting the next Big War.

It is a notion so horrible
in its potential consequences, that
most Americans
will just not realistically
face up to it yet.
Even as our "leaders"
plan and hope
for it.

Maybe Ahmandinejad will be able to
come off as a magnanimous peacemaker and,
in the worst-case scenario,
"show up" Bu$hCo.
(horrors!)

But any PR slip-up by Ahmandinejad
will be milked dry by the administration
and the corporate media as excuse
for belligerence against his country.

I mean, heck,
our aircraft-carrier-groups
are already in place, right?

[Yukon Jack]

Ahmedinejad wants to lay a wreath at Ground Zero in order to honor the 10 Islamic terrorists, who perished along with their innocent victims.

[Grago]

If we're not outraged by Bush going to Ground Zero, why should we be outraged by Ahmandinejad doing likewise?

[WomanForPeaceSanity]

This whole debate is a bit tragic, don't you think? I remember that the people of Iran were totally behind the United States and took to the streets right after 9/11 to show sympathy and support for our country after this tragic incident. What a tremendous opportunity we had then to unite all people to condemn acts of terror by fanatics everywhere on the planet. Instead, our government decided to invade a sovereign country that completely innocent of any proven involvement in the 9/11 attacks! Now, we have the head of another sovereign Middle Eastern country being told he cannot visit the sight of a great tragedy, with which he has had nothing to do. What is WRONG with this picture?
Anyone who expects to find real news on the mainstream media news shows is sadly misguided. I'm glad that this blogger pointed this out! All bluster and no substance!

[MagisterLudi]

Let AssmanDoesJihad talk! His big mouth is Iran's worse enemy.
Every idiotic statement he spewes clarifies the true nature of Iran's mullahs.
And by the way, in Iran AssmanDoesJihad is moderate!

[Unrepentantliberal]

I was amazed when I heard that the President of Iran would not be allowed to visit Ground Zero. How stupid. It would of been a nice gesture on his part but somehow the New York City Police and our government can't help but act like spoiled immature children. Is it any wonder the rest of the world looks down on us and all we can say in reply to explain our actions is USA, USA, USA. We might as well be chanting, STUPID, STUPID, STUPID.

Talking is always better than war. Most Iranians like the United States and Presidents are transient figures. Both Bush and Ahmandinejad will soon depart their respective national stages. Let us not take actions that can turn potential friends into enemies.

If Bush would of been President during the Cold War, the Earth would be nothing but a black, lifeless, cinder. Peace for everyone.

[TheIndependenceParty]

Thank you Kristen. Wisdom comes of loss, and the understanding of loss.

Years ago a misguided Secretary of the Interior explored imposing a fee for driving or jogging through Valley Forge National Park. For those who have been there in Winter, there is a sense that nothing we could offer would ever prove us worthy of the sacrifice made there on our behalves by the Army that Saved our Revolution from failure. To charge admission for what was a solemn gift to our People, paid in blood, would trivialize that sacrifice.

And so it is with the site of the World Trade Center. Dozens of nations lost citizens on the day they fell. The dimensions of the loss and suffering that day touched millions of people, none moreso than you and your family.

And now, many men come forth who say they wish to pay tribute to those souls touched by the tragedy. Some pretend to own that day, ... wearing it as a badge of honor where none was earned. And others may come to dissemble before that site of your loss, ... perhaps for political gain, and perhaps even to rub our noses in our loss, in the ashes of those we lost, and whom you loved.

They all should come, and be humbled by what happened that day, by the number of lives changed that day. They should gaze through glass windows with the absent outlines of those towers etched against the sky where they once stood. And upon those etchings there should be movies of women and men, tossing their babies in the air, and catching subways to make a living. Their should be videos cast before everyone of birthday parties missed, and anniversaries sacrificed.

Let these men who come to pay homage meet the examples of your families and your lost, and their own countrymen who died that day. Meet that measure, and they will change the world. They have the power, if only they could find the will.

Come they must. Let anyone come and see what happened there, so that it may not happen again.

[kaja]

Not the greatest blog, Kristen.
Of course he is another nut job just like our own nut job. The Iranian people do not like him anymore than we like Bush,
If you have been paying any attention at all, the Atomic Energy Commission has been allowed to follow the nuclear sites in Iran and have posted their reports, something the MSM has overlooked.
He may be looking for just a photo op like our photo op crazy leader, so what, why not. It wasn't Iranians who flew into NYC on that day, it was Saudis.
Why haven't we gotton that message yet?

[deminmo]

I agree, the statesman approach would have been a handshake from Bush at Ground Zero, and pictures world-wide.

[benalbanach]

Ahmadinejad and Cheney should each visit ground zero and Fox News should be required to run a poll as to which of the two is the greater threat to the security of the United States and the world.(Supervised by the United Nations as should be your elections)

[Hansharriet]

Kristen, you are wrong. You advocate, that we should talk with Ahnmandinejad. Well, this guy denies the Holocaust ever happened. One has to understand, that to negotiate with a person like that is interpreted as weakness. Remember Chamberlain who wanted to negotiate with Hitler?

[NHGranite]

First they say it was Bin Laden. When that doesn't scare us, they forget him and blame Saddam. Now he's gone, and they make the boogie man Ahmandinejad. Oo, how scary; he asked permission first, how terrifying!

[iamwhatnormalis]

Damn it. Why don't you for once acknowledge that there is one candidate who doesn't claim to be outraged. One does wish to dialogue with Iran, Syria, and any other nation that is willing to talk. You know who I mean. Dennis Kucinich. Stop marginalizing this fine, intelligent, statesmanlike candidate.

[KittyHegemann]

Iran assisted us when we went Afghanistan to get rid of Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Don't forget that.