28 June 2008
War of Ideas
Western civilization has long diverted the elites of Iran from the rigors of Islamic dogma. They admire and emulate American and European culture. The expatriate Persian communities of the U.S. and Western Europe are strong. Nevertheless, most of those who are not tormented for religious reasons maintain personal and commercial ties to Iran because of the private and monetary rewards those ties bring. And even in Iran, surreptitious adoption of modern secular mores is widespread.
Why the dichotomy between the behavioral preferences of its wealthy and educated upper class and the doctrinally conservative, polemically radical, intolerant political leadership? As Marjane Satrapi has noted in her book, “Persepolis,” that’s the Persian way. Over a millennium of authoritarian rule has calcified the people’s mental barrier between enjoying, on one side, the pleasures of life and withstanding, on the other side, the indignities imposed by power-hungry dynastic, military, or religious oppressors.
Therefore, I disagree with the assertion by James K. Glassman in his OpEd article in the June 24, 2008, Wall Street Journal, “How to Win the War of Ideas,” that ideological confrontation should appeal to the Iranian population--neither its elite nor its common segments. However, the lack of effective domestic opposition to the human rights violations of the Iranian regime and to its aggressive international politics does not make U.S. or collective military intervention justifiable or reasonable without direct threats to our security. It does strengthen the argument for energetic support of an indigenous resistance movement; but that will take time and will require a Persian degree of patience in the secular West.
Western civilization has long diverted the elites of Iran from the rigors of Islamic dogma. They admire and emulate American and European culture. The expatriate Persian communities of the U.S. and Western Europe are strong. Nevertheless, most of those who are not tormented for religious reasons maintain personal and commercial ties to Iran because of the private and monetary rewards those ties bring. And even in Iran, surreptitious adoption of modern secular mores is widespread.
Why the dichotomy between the behavioral preferences of its wealthy and educated upper class and the doctrinally conservative, polemically radical, intolerant political leadership? As Marjane Satrapi has noted in her book, “Persepolis,” that’s the Persian way. Over a millennium of authoritarian rule has calcified the people’s mental barrier between enjoying, on one side, the pleasures of life and withstanding, on the other side, the indignities imposed by power-hungry dynastic, military, or religious oppressors.
Therefore, I disagree with the assertion by James K. Glassman in his OpEd article in the June 24, 2008, Wall Street Journal, “How to Win the War of Ideas,” that ideological confrontation should appeal to the Iranian population--neither its elite nor its common segments. However, the lack of effective domestic opposition to the human rights violations of the Iranian regime and to its aggressive international politics does not make U.S. or collective military intervention justifiable or reasonable without direct threats to our security. It does strengthen the argument for energetic support of an indigenous resistance movement; but that will take time and will require a Persian degree of patience in the secular West.
Comments:
Post a Comment
