How Much Does America Understand about Iran? Enough to Shoot Itself in the Foot

Sometimes the United States seems to be governed by boy scouts (those good-hearted, well-meaning children who are always looking for trouble). At the end of last month, after 30 years, the U.S. opened a … virtual embassy in Tehran. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a distinguished catastrophe of diplomacy, on this occasion once again lived up to her reputation. In her peripatetic enthusiasm (she travels the world without rest and without results, while also spending a lot of money), she declared that, thanks to this clever concoction, the two peoples will be able to communicate “openly and without fear.” It is worth quoting her at length: “Because the United States and Iran do not have diplomatic relations, we have missed some important opportunities for dialogue with you, the citizens of Iran. But today we can use new technologies to bridge that gap and promote greater understanding between our two countries and the peoples of each country, which is why we established this virtual embassy.” There are two possibilities: Either the embassy will bypass the authorities in order to talk to the citizens, or discussions will take place between the countries, which means that the classic green table of negotiations is again the solution.

“A greater understanding?” When was it great? At the end of 1978, when President Carter’s adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, reassured the Shah of all his support, thus fulfilling the Iranian saying that promises have value only for those who believe in them?

Understanding? The Americans have never understood the Iranians. They did not understand them when they supported Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. The exportation of democracy was limited to the CIA providing training to the Savak (the most terrible internal repression and censorship organism, prior to the more subtle mechanisms devised by the Islamic Revolution). The import of progress (i.e., huge and often reckless investments) is rusting under the desert sand. A great Polish journalist, Ryszard Kapuscinski, made a first-hand recording of hallucinating stories:

“… [t]he Shah is making purchases costing billions, and ships full of merchandise are steaming toward Iran from all the continents. But when they reach the Gulf, it turns out that the small obsolete ports are unable to handle such a mass of cargo (the Shah hadn’t realized this). Several hundred ships line up at sea and stay there for up to six months. Somehow the ships are gradually unloaded, but it turns out that there are no warehouses (the Shah hadn’t realized this). The remaining cargo now has to be transported to the depths of the country, and at this moment it turns out that there is no transport (the Shah hadn’t realized). It turns out there are no drivers (the Shah hadn’t realized). After much consultation, an airliner flies off to bring South Korean truckers from Seoul. … But once the truck drivers pick up a few words of Farsi, they discover they’re making only half as much as native drivers. Outraged, they abandon their rigs and return to Korea. The trucks, unused to this day, still sit, covered with sand, along the Bander Abbas-Teheran highway. … If you drive from Shiraz to Isfahan even today you’ll see hundreds of helicopters parked off to the right of the highway. … Whole fields of abandoned cannons can be seen near Qom, other hundreds of abandoned tanks near Avhaz…”

Since 1982, when The New York Times Book Review deemed Kapuscinski’s observations to be a “valuable contribution to the understanding” of Iran’s contemporary history, realities have changed considerably.

The Islamic Revolution brought waves of profiteers, who gradually acquired their current positions around oil pipes. After he became the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khomeini — who in 1979 managed to unite the clergy with the bazaar (a force nothing can oppose) under the slogan “Na sharghi na gharbi, jomhuri-ye eslami!” (Neither Eastern nor Western; only the Islamic Republic!) — continued to eat rice with yogurt. He kept away from the Peacock Throne and lived in a small room “furnished” with a mattress, but full of books. When he was not making up motivational slogans or applying labels that were impossible to remove, Khomeini was a poet (and a very interesting mystical poet at that).

Anti-American slogans and the “Great Satan” epithet used to designate America date back to the period of the so-called hostage crisis, when the U.S.’ diplomatic relations with Iran were severed for good. (Tehran refers to Israel as the “Small Satan”). This was the period riddled with brief judgments and assassinations, which typically follow the victory of any revolution. From Nov. 1979, to Jan. 1981, A few hundred young people occupied the U.S. embassy, demanding that the Shah be extradited (he had been admitted to a New York hospital for cancer treatment). In the meantime, the Shah was politely invited to leave the United States and was forced to wander about Panama for a short while, after which he was granted asylum in Egypt by President Anwar Sadat, the only one who had the courage to have him, and who even organized a national funeral ceremony for him in July 1980. The hostage crisis continued purposelessly until Ronald Reagan moved into the White House. The hostages were released a few minutes after the ceremony. But no one has bothered to rebuild diplomatic relations since then. The following U.S. leaders, culminating with Bush, Jr., created their own anti-Iranian slogans. Meanwhile, the theocratic regime in Tehran formed all possible alliances. And this is what it will do now in order to minimize the effects of the new wave of economic sanctions. It is a big world, and Russia and China (to mention just two of the states on the horizon) are waiting for Iran with arms wide open.

I will not dwell upon the stories about atomic weapons or the closing of the Strait of Hormuz. Maybe at some other time, at length. Then we will also inform Mrs. Clinton that she was not the one who introduced “new technologies” to Iran, as most members of the clergy have blogs and Facebook profiles.

The Ayatollah regime, corrupt to the bone, is carefully monitoring oil and gas exports (which is in fact how they acquired all their wealth, and not by reading the Quran). In the summer of 2010, they replied to the threat of tighter international sanctions by pointing out that after 30 years of embargos, they do not have many dollars anyway, so they might set the price of the oil barrel in Rials or Euros. Which means that the United States, which has recently printed $7 trillion, can go back to primitive communism. On the other hand, the European Union — “encouraged” from across the ocean to cease all energy trade with Iran — is the Americans’ gift to Russia!

Mrs. Clinton, however, is diligently guarding the Internet. When people were dying in the streets of Tehran during the 2009 elections, shouting “Dictatori tamaeh, na shah na amameh!” (Dictatorship is finished! Neither Crown nor Turban!), she pretended to be politically correct, while President Obama was eating ice-cream somewhere far from the madding crowd. After they eventually came back to their senses, they still failed to understand. The Green Revolution of the Iranian opposition is not even remotely a movement in favor of Western democracy (which is itself struggling in its current form). People are simply trying to reform the corrupt Ayatollah regime and gain their civil rights. The emergence of a common enemy is a godsend for the followers of theocracy, who can exult over the strong Persian nationalism and thus preserve their privileges.

By the way, as I am preparing to add the final touches to this text, the homepage of the U.S. Virtual Embassy in Iran displays very interesting opening material on Hanukkah …