Why Rejecting Ahmadinejad's Visit Was a Big Mistake

President Ahmadinejad of Iran recently expressed interest in visiting the site of the World Trade Center to "pay tribute" to those who lost their lives on September 11. However, the State Department immediately issued a statement saying that in no way will he be permitted to make such a visit and rebranded him as a state sponsor of terror. Giuliani also issued his own statement -- as he often does about everything under the sun these days -- expressing his vigorous opposition to such a visit, and out of complete and utter ignorance, unfoundedly accused Shiite Ahmadinejad of supporting Sunni Al Qaeda, a claim so preposterous that even the Bush administration has not made. The main lesson to take from the whole story is not just that Giuliani needs to start reading the foreign policy books that Ron Paul recently recommended to him, but also that after the dust and smoke settle, opposition to visit by Ahmadinejad will prove to be a major foreign policy faux pas.

Let's put it in perspective. Iran has one of the worst human rights records in the world. Nonetheless, the United States has stunningly kept silent about those violations even as it is so desperately trying to line up excuses to justify a possible military strike against Tehran. By continuing to alienate and vilify Ahmadinejad without the willingness to face him, they are giving him ammunition to get on IRIB (Iranian state-run television) and claim victory, saying that the American government is too afraid to let him visit because some Americans may begin to sympathize with this move. After all, it is very difficult to prove you are not a "state-sponsor of terror" when you are not allowed to be anything else, or that you are condemned regardless of what you do.

This is not the first time Ahmadinejad has scored such a moral victory. Just a few months ago, he demanded that President Bush debate him on Iran's nuclear program, and Bush refused. He used Bush's refusal to claim the moral high ground without getting challenged on his brutal human rights record and other social oppressions within Iran. He has found a way to play the most powerful country in the world to score political points and false legitimacy at home, and he is exploiting it to its full capacity. Oppressors aren't supposed to have it this easy.

Now imagine a different scenario where the United States would allow him to visit Ground Zero. But once he is in New York giving a press conference, tens of Persian intellectuals and political dissidents flood the conference and ask pointed questions about the theocratic state's violations of human rights, women's freedoms, economy and joblessness, massive censorship of channels of information -- including the recent blocking of the Google Website and Gmail service to be accessed from within Iran -- and every other travesty he has brought upon his country. Then let him stumble over those questions and allow Iranians to watch his humiliation on their banned TV satellites and Voice Of America news network. As there is no First Amendment or freedom of speech for such a news conference to ever take place within Iran, such an event would not only be an incredible breakthrough in forcing the dictator (as he is now widely called in Tehran) to answer questions, but it will strengthen America's position on the diplomatic stage and defense for human rights, isolate Ahmadinejad and deter him from ever daring to claim the moral high ground, energize the pro-western reformists in Iran and significantly help America's popularity among Iranians.

But the reason that the current administration and many other status quo politicians wouldn't want you to directly listen to Ahmadinejad, Bin Laden, Kim Jung Ill or other adversaries is simple. In order for the ruling class in this country to divert the attention of people from the growing gap between the rich and the poor as well as America's hypocritical foreign policies (such as allowing Israel to terrorize Palestinians, possess nuclear weapons and do all of that without joining the NPT), they must frame the debate as a tale of good versus evil. In this tale, we are to fill the role of the good with a messianic mission of spreading the good word and annihilate the evil. It is based on such observation that Noam Chomsky so astutely observes in his latest book, Failed States, that over the years, American political leaders have developed a series of concepts to justify the use of force in international affairs, beginning with the battle against the communist menace, gradually replaced with "terrorist states" and "war on terrorism" as communism wore thin in the eighties, followed by "rogue states," and eventually "failed states." One may add to that list the newly created term "Islamo-fascism." These terms have gradually been modified to represent narrower definitions as the definitions of preceding terms repeatedly proved to be too broad to include the targeted states and exclude the United States and its hypocritical policies abroad. Allowing Americans to listen to Ahmadinejad or other "rogue" leaders without the filter of the media or U.S. government spin, our political leaders are afraid that some Americans may draw conclusions that are incompatible with the tale that the ruling class in this country have told to generation after generation. This is one of the most naked examples of how U.S. politicians go out of their way to prevent people from drawing their own judgment.

If the United States is sincere in its democratic claims, it needs to not just support democracy and other countries' sovereignty when it serves U.S. interests, but to take actions that are designed to promote democratic principles at home and abroad and level the playing field for civil discourse. By isolating itself and preventing Ahmadinejad from visiting Ground Zero, America not only lost a great opportunity to score a major victory on the world stage, but it further gave Ahmadinejad undeserved legitimacy to continue to arrest, torture and kill Persians with an iron fist.

Comments

[TMariner]

I agree that we should have let the Iranian leader visit the WTC site. The reason that the families of those killed by the friends of Ahmadinejad were denied access a few weeks ago was that in the heavy construction zone they may have gotten hurt.

No one would have wanted the crane operator with an American flag on his hard hat and a "remember 9/11" on the back window of his SUV to have made a mistake and lost control of the 50 ton beams that would be traversing overhead. Hint, hint.

[tcagle]

It appears they wanted to avoid the photo op of Ahmadinejad laying a wreath on the crater of the WTC, probably thinking it would be for the terrorists, not the civilians.

[SilverBurlap]

It was probably more because they didn't want to offend Saudi Arabia and Israel by showing any sort of reconciliation with the Shiite Iran.

This article makes a very good point concerning our standing in the Middle East and how Bush has weakened our moral highground. We are supposed to stand for Democracy, human rights, and fairness to all beliefs, yet we discriminate in the Middle East. Whats worse is that we have unilaterally attacked a country unprovoked and continued to practice torture.

I know its a faux-pas to talk of our invasion of Iraq, but we cannot forget how much it hurt our standing in the world. We used to stand for good things, as a great liberator of societies that needed our help. Now, we are somewhere far darker, and pundits like OReilly and politicians like Lieberman think that if we just keep along the path we will succeed.

Clearly, our policies aren't working and when policies don't work you change them. We haven't, and under Bush we won't. We need a radical shift in our Middle Eastern and world policy if we want radical change at all. This means talking to anyone and everyone who is willing. This means staying out of other countries affairs and focusing on the United States homeland, which needs a lot of work.

The United States wasn't meant to be a country of tough guy punks. Democrats need to run off of a platform of restoring our country to pre-World war status. And don't give me everything's changed after 9/11, because if we hadn't screwed around over there it wouldn't have happened anyways. We deal with it now like real, fair Americans, get out and focus on ourselves.

[jgo]

"In order for the ruling class in this country to divert the attention of people from the growing gap between the rich and the poor as well as America's hypocritical foreign policies (such as allowing Israel to terrorize Palestinians, possess nuclear weapons and do all of that without joining the NPT)"

I see you figured it out. It's not a war between civilizations ,it's a war between people who take risks, work hard and produce results, and those who claim they are "victims" and rejoice with glee the penalizing of the productive sector. I guess this explains in a time ofno draft, the unproductive screaming bloody murder when public money is spent on something other than their free pensions.
As for Israel and the Palestine, have you ever wondered why the entire Middle East does very little for them?
How many did the King of Jordan kill during the 70's? Do you want to compare him to Israel?

[JudyGee]

Apparently, the same cell uses one computer.

[Henry]

Ahmadinejad plays chess with little George who has trouble with checkers.

[matahari888]

Sam Sedae wrote....
"Iran has one of the worst human rights records in the world. Nonetheless, the United States has stunningly kept silent about those violations even as it is so desperately trying to line up excuses to justify a possible military strike against Tehran...."
Who's records whose????? what do you think happend in Iraq, Afghanistan, Darfur, Palestine, lebanon and many other country, and how about what happend inside here??? heloooo....where's have you been?????everywhere US involved in a name of Democratization region????? Ask other country...US i still the biggest bully country and againts humanity.

[nonjudgemental9482]

You had me until the conspiracy rhetoric. The decision is probably mostly political but not that great of a distraction from what you believe to be important issues. I find it much more disturbing that Columbia U invited the guy to speak and then rescinded the offer after negative publicity. What is the harm in giving him a forum?

[Plowboy]

Let's be honest. Iran's human rights record is no worse than ours. They do not claim to be above the law. They haven't invaded other countries, captured people resisting the invasion, labelled them terrorists and carted them off to torture camps where they would be held indefinitely without any legal action.
Nor is their record worse than Israel's.
On the other hand, when our dear Shah was still the tyrant there and the SAVAK was still in action, the record would have put most competitors to shame.

[hoopoe]

exactly. we have a foreign policy of projection: whatever is worst about us, we accuse others of doing or being - so much easier than confronting our own shadow.

i doubt if there was too much thought involved in this policy of denying ahmadinejad - he wins whatever we decide because he can play the compassionate mourner or the rebuffed friend equally. no doubt he will say he extended his hand in sympathy and was rejected; that, despite his efforts, there is no hope for civil relations with the US. he 'made the first move' so to speak, and was cruelly rejected.

but the anti-iran cabal is so terrified of letting this man have a human face among americans. so much better if he is a caricature of evil they can draw any way they like than a person with his own motives and intentions. (and how lucky he doesn't speak english, so they can twist his statements to say anything they like.)

i am not saying that i approve of everything he does - i certainly do not. but i shouldn't have to defend the rights of world leaders against my own country's policies, nor should i be forced to choose sides in a conflict between my country and iran. but let's be honest: who is in the wrong here?

[Stormm]

I agree with this article. I think it's a BIG mistake not to allow your enemy to stick his own foot firmly in his mouth under his own initiative. The problem is that our enemy, Bush and his cronies keep hogging all the limelight with both feet firmly planted up to their ankles and won't let the other jerks get their turn. I think they're afraid that if we hear the other guy speak words other than those we put into his mouth (attribute to him) we might not like our own jerks anymore.

[trevor01]

It is hard to imagine a greater mistake than to treat visitors so callously. In much of the world (if not the USA) there is a cultural imperative to welcome and to treat guests with generosity. Many Americans are already ashamed of US foreign policy. Here is another very good reason for them to be embarrassed.

[cognate]

Well said.

American politicians, with very few exceptions, have lost all legitimacy. They stay in power by feeding us lies.

Ron Paul for president.

[FlowerGirl]

Lies? Our political leaders? But they all tell us how wonderful Israel is. And they keep telling us the same stories about Iran that they once told us about Iraq. And before that Afghanistan. And before that .....
That has gone on for a long time. Every now and then they tell us that we have to go to war. I think they want us to go to war with Iran.
For they tell us the same horrible things about Ahmedinejad that they once told us about the late Saddam, who had been our friend when he invaded Iran if you recall. We gave him weapons for that.
Then we double crossed him and gave Iran weapons too. And that was because we are good.
Or was that a lie too? aren't we good?