Post #161 - Real World Consequences

When we (the United States) go to war, we do it in a way that is quite different from the way most countries do it. For starters, though we account for a huge proportion of the world's military expenditures (nearly half), we have a rather small percentage of our population who actually enter the military, and they are (these days) going in voluntarily. It's not like the Vietnam era, when there was a draft. It's not like Israel, where virtually every young person serves their time. It's not, thank God, like some countries where "soldiers" are impressed into an army at the age of fifteen, or twelve or younger, by brutal coercion.

The circumstances of our "raising" of a military force lead to some anomalies. First, we are, for the most part, blissfully unaware of the specifics of what it takes to prosecute a major conflict. We must never forget that he have not experienced war on our own turf, as it were, since the middle of the nineteenth century.  We also don't know our own troops -- the ones who ship out to the other side of the world to carry out our bidding.

Still from "Where Soldiers Come From"

In the new documentary "Where Soldiers Come From, " one sees that many young men (and women, of course, but mostly men) find themselves enlisting, being inducted and serving in the military often without any real sense of why they are doing it, or what the outcomes might be. They enlist because their buddy did, or because there is a tradition of service to the country. When they come home, they may still not know exactly why they were there, especially in the recent conflicts.  Are they virtuous?  That's a hard question, even for them.  Are they brave?  Yes.  Will they, after being trained and briefed, fight like hell to protect their comrades in arms (their buddies), try to stay alive, and to carry out their mission?  Certainly (probably in that order).

To some extent, every eighteen- or twenty-year-old does a lot of things on auto-pilot. We go to college if our parents did, we go into the family business because it's expected, we go to war because our father, or uncle or older brother did. And then...what happens happens. A lot happens.

The magazine DAV ("The Official Voice of the Disabled American Veterans and DAV Auxiliary") just featured an article entitled "Burden of War Growing." They didn't mean that the monetary cost to the American taxpayer is growing (though it is). They didn't mean that the political cost to the Obama administration is growing; it probably isn't. They were referring to the human cost in terms of injury and lost capacity to function.

A Pew Research Center survey they cited showed that of those who had served in combat, almost a quarter of them had become disabled. About half said that their health was fair or poor. Some 47% of soldiers with a spouse and/or children suffered from PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder).

Matt Beaudoin, who suffers from traumatic brain injury

Now, I have had some experience with folks who have PTSD. Let me tell you that it is not something that you can shrug off, like a sinus headache or even a broken ankle. It is a trauma that changes who you are (in this case, as a husband or wife, as a father, and as a worker). Therefore, it is not hard to understand that fifty-four percent -- over half -- have trouble readjusting to civilian life. It helps explain why almost every day a returnee ends his or her own life.

The Veterans Health Administration director estimates that today's roughly $2 billion that it takes to care for the current crop of veterans may swell to as much as eight-plus billion in 2020 -- see, we can't very well just stop taking care of them just because the particular hostilities stop (if they stop).

These musings concern our own troops -- our own young people. What about all the others?

At Guantanamo, according to ACLU, 92% of those incarcerated have not been found to be al Qaeda fighters (reported in Time Magazine, January 23, 2011). Among the 779 we imprisoned, twenty-one were children, as young as thirteen. The oldest was 98. (One wonders how much of a threat he could be; apparently enough that he could not be held by civilian jails, or even brought into the United States proper, without endangering American citizens.) The vast majority were handed over to U.S. custody because we offered a bounty to someone to provide them. Some of them have spent ten years, without a trial to either condemn them or exonerate them.

The number of civilians that gave their lives to oust Saddam and usher in an uncertain new future has been estimated at 100,000 or more. Afghani deaths have yet to be properly counted, but will be considerable.

This is all generated by Iraq and Afghanistan. What will be generated by a strike (overt or covert) on Iran? How many pilots will have to fly over Iran, to observe or bomb, while Iranians attempt to shoot them down? How many will be on U.S. ships within range of Iranian missiles, planes or other craft? How many will be targeted at an embassy or just on the street, following the assault, in some country or another, just because the opportunity presents itself to some covert agent?

When the children or grandchildren of a soldier ask "why did you have to get hurt?." or "why did Daddy have to die? or "Why does Momma act that way?" it won't really matter very much whether it was to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, to stop al Qaeda in Afghanistan or to keep Iran from having a bomb. The question will be asked, and someone will attempt to answer it. Whatever answer they manage to give will likely be inadequate and will never satisfy the kid asking it.

Post #160 - A Presence

I present this graphic from the Russian International News Agency (RIA-Novosti), without comment (except to thank Voices for Russia, who put me on to it):

Post #159 - Parsi, continued

(More on the Washington Post article by Trita Parsi of NIAC.)

Other lessons that Parsi gleaned from the past half-century of failed diplomacy with Iran:

"Respect and tone matter... the United States and Iran have been trying to coerce one another into submission rather than negotiating toward compromise." A Turkish diplomat is cited: "When you put intimidation and coercion ahead of respect, it falls apart.”

(map by Revista Italiana di Geopolitica)

Next, "Don’t limit the agenda...negotiations focused on one variable — the development of nuclear weapons — is not a formula for success." (We saw that the proposal Tehran sent via the Swiss in 2003 was amazingly comprehensive -- it treated all the important bones of contention that the two countries have been gnawing on for decades.) This means that even the tough issues should be on the table -- "Brazil raised the issue of human rights, a sensitive topic for Tehran."

On the other hand, Parsi says, "Put nuclear inspections and verification at the center" of the negotiating agenda. How can nuclear enrichment be "inspected, verified, limited and controlled," since it is not likely to be dropped from Iran's list of must-haves (and is permitted under NPT rules).

He also urges, as Limbert did, the skillful and creative use of intermediaries (a time-honored method of dispute resolution in the Middle East and elsewhere). "[N]ations such as Norway, Sweden, South Africa, Oman and Qatar can help overcome the current impasse, primarily by bridging the trust gap..." (though trust still will have to be earned by both sides as part of the process).

Ending his piece, Parsi states, "Sustained, persistent diplomacy remains untested...It is superior to war and sanctions for the simple fact that, if successful, it not only could prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, but the reduced tensions would lessen Iran’s demand for nuclear deterrence...One simply cannot threaten or sanction a country into a sense of security."

(Trita Parsi is the author of the new book A Single Roll of the Dice: Obama’s Diplomacy With Iran.)

Post #158 - Why Do They Make It So Hard?

The Washington Post today carried an OpEd piece by Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council. Dr. Parsi [full disclosure: Parsi is a friend and colleague of mine; we were co-founders of the Council], wrote on "How Obama Should Talk to Iran." Notice that he vaulted right over the question of whether or not such talks should happen, to the question of how.

"Just 13 minutes into his presidency, Barack Obama indirectly reached out to Iran in his inaugural address, offering America’s hand of friendship if Tehran would unclench its fist," Parsi noted. "But Obama’s diplomacy has fallen short." Since the fall of 2009, "Iran and the United States have been on a confrontational path." In fact, "Iran and the United States are inching closer to a military confrontation." However, war is not inevitable, Parsi believes and diplomacy can still lead to a resolution of the stand-off.

Ahmadinezhad and Brazil's Luis Inacio Lula de Silva

Parsi relates a conversation with an unnamed "senior State Department official" who said: "Our Iran diplomacy was a gamble on a single roll of the dice.” Oddly, "Turkey and Brazil secured a version of the fuel swap that Obama had sought" only a few months earlier (surprisingly they were not met with kudos from the United States and its closest allies for their achievement). "But by then," Parsi said, "it was too late. The Obama administration was already on the path to sanctions"

Parsi's main point is this: "Instead of continuing toward a war the U.S. military doesn’t want, we should double down on diplomacy, in part by emulating Turkey and Brazil’s efforts." He cites recent reports that "Iran would be open to talks later this month with the P5+1 negotiating group — China, France, Germany, Russia, Britain and the United States" and lists lessons that the experience of Turkey and Brazil ought to teach us, the main lesson being: "Talk to everyone -- and talk a lot."

Parsi recognizes that because of the complexity of Iranian politics and governance, Western officials can be genuinely stumped by the question of whom to talk to within the Iranian regime. "The futile search for a sole authoritative Iranian partner often causes diplomacy to be rejected before it even begins. Turkey and Brazil did not fall into this trap. Instead, they recognized that there are many power centers in Iran — including the supreme leader’s office, the parliament, the president’s circle of advisers, the National Security Council and influential clergymen — all of which need to be included in the process."

In other words, no one promised us a rose garden. As John Limbert took pains to emphasize in his book on the subject, it will definitely not be easy or quick. On the U.S. side, we are accustomed to having laws, treaties or trade deals vetted variously by the White House, member of Congress, the non-partisan Government Accountability Office, the Office of Management and Budget, the business community, trade unions and environmentalists. Sometimes, faith communities, states or local governments weigh in, to say nothing of the judiciary, including the Supreme Court. Why would we expect that a near-eastern theocracy  formed only 32 years ago should be any less complex when it deals with foreign relations matters of huge consequence? Parsi quotes a Middle Eastern journalist in saying just that, “There is one country that resembles the Iranian power structure, it’s the United States of America. [To get a deal], talking to the president is not enough. You have to talk to everyone.”

Ever notice that those who have a clear-cut solution to "the problem of Iran" seem to be the ones who know the least about both history and about contemporary Iranian society? As someone put it, "To every complicated human problem, there is a very simple solution.....it's utterly wrong, but it's simple."


(to be continued in my next post)

Post $157 - Xenophobia

"I am a sojourner in a strange land." (Exodus 2:22)

"I saw the snares that the enemy spreads out over the world and I said groaning, 'What can get through from such snares?' Then I heard a voice saying to me, 'Humility.' "  (St. Anthony the Great)

For many years, one talked of America perennially swinging between isolationism and internationalism. In the last decade we've managed to combine the least attractive aspects of each. We projected massive U.S. power abroad while often listening to no one else, even our staunchest allies. We squandered decades-old goodwill and the special sympathy that grew out of 9/11, and thereby isolated ourselves more than at any time in recent memory. This trend seemed to be reversed after President Obama came to office, especially in his Cairo speech, delivered June 9, 2009. He said, as a part of that historic speech, which was directed mainly to Muslims of the world:

"For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically-elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I have made it clear to Iran's leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question, now, is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build.

Pakistani listens to Obama speech (NY Daily News)

"It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America's interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path.

"I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation – including Iran – should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal."

Yet, since then, the relationship seems not to have changed all that much. It is not just the attitude toward negotiations -- both sides have evinced openness to some sort of talks. But while they talk about talking, actual actions are taken that make that option more and more unattainable. American travelers are held in Iranian prisons and threatened with severe sentences on dubious charges. Iranian scientists are assassinated in the street. Iran threatens international commerce in its coastal waters, while trade with Iran is choked by punitive sanctions.

Rick Santorum - pro-gay rights....for Iranians

The political season raises a determination to "deal with" Iran with iron resolve and without mercy to the level of a litmus test for many -- some of whom know about as much about Iran as I do about glassblowing (I know that heat and air are involved, but beyond that...). At their worst, such declarations appeal to base xenophobia, by painting the adversary as totally unlike us, driven by perverse motives, and controlled by malevolent passions.  The system is demonically inspired and their leaders are buffoons, dictators, maniacs or all of the above.

Remember that the Christian tradition, starting with the Apostle Paul, is that the Good News is to be proclaimed to all -- xenophobia could have nipped Christianity in the bud, were it not for God's having revealed His truth to the man then called Saul on the road to Damascus – one of the Middle Eastern capitals that our own leaders now decline to visit (unless it might be to dethrone the ruler there). Xenophobia is still a poor basis for foreign policy.

When I read the excellent ethnography Women of Deh Koh: Lives in an Iranian Village, what struck me most about author Erika Friedl's introduction was the professionalism and humility captured in this short sentence: “For almost five years of the last twenty years I have lived in Deh Koh as a stranger learning to listen.” She decried both dismissive judgments of village life as backward and in need of “saving,” and romantic visions of a heroic and idyllic pastoral existence. Opting instead to actually pay attention to how her subjects themselves understood their lives, Friedl modeled the kind of sober, sensitive approach that we should take toward the people of other nations. To listen is not always to agree, but not to listen is to court disaster. An American who traveled to Iran this year, Stanley Rich, wrote: “The Persian poet Hafiz instructs us in compassionate listening to others: 'How should I listen to others? As if everyone was my master speaking to me his cherished last words.'”

My own prayer, as I prepared to return to Iran a few years ago, was this:

Lord, guide my feet to walk in Iranian shoes.

Lord, guide my hands to reach out to theirs.

Lord, incline my head to listen and understand.

Lord, let my mouth give forth only kind words.

Lord, strengthen my legs to carry me to journey’s end.

Lord, give us Your peace.

Post #156 - Don't Sell Them Short

Baluchi women

There are almost 74 million Iranians. Only 58% of them have Persian as their first language, with Turkish and other Turkic languages being spoken by about a quarter of the population, Kurdish by 5%, and the remainder speaking tribal languages (Lor, Baluchi, Bakhtiari, Talesh and Qashqai) or Arabic (the mother tongue for only 2% of Iranians, though all Muslims know some Arabic). Some 89% are Shi'ite, 10% Sunni, and the rest a mix of Zoroastrian, Christian and Baha'i. The Revolution of 1979 ended over 2500 years of nearly continuous monarchical rule, but it introduced a form of government that was new to Iran only in degree. Periodically, throughout its history, Iran has had an ascendancy of clerical influence, whether Zoroastrian or Muslim.

Beauty salon, downtown Tehran

Two-thirds of Iranians today live in urban centers, but its network of rural villages, and its long mountain ranges and vast stretches of sparsely-populated arid land are important elements of Iranian national culture as well. Many Iranians are still nomadic, following their herds to high meadows in the summer and down to the fertile plains in the winter. Many Iranians, whether highly-educated or illiterate, can recite poetry till the sheep come home (there are not many cows in Iran).

(Speaking of sheep...strangely, my time in Iran as a young man also drew me closer to the Middle Eastern world of the incarnate Jesus. I remember walking, on a late-fall afternoon in 1968, past one of the many narrow sheep caves dug into the hillsides of my little Iranian town. It was a place where livestock were put to be fed, and to sleep when the temperatures dropped (to 25 below the winter I spent there). Suddenly, I realized that just such a cave was the kind of place that would have held the manger where Our Lord was born. It was the humblest accommodation one could imagine for a young couple about to become a family. If something happened in that sort of place, only the shepherds abiding in the field would be likely to know about it – or perhaps magi – those Zoroastrian wise men who came (from what is now Iran) for the first Christmas.)

Stylish hijab

Some Iranians are conservative and monkish clerics who spend their days in prayer and discussion of finer points of theology, much like scholars of the Hebrew Tanakh, the sages of China or the monastics on Mount Athos. A growing number of Iranians are web-savvy young people who push the rules of “Islamically-correct" clothing to the absolute breaking-point to show their personal sense of style. A good fit for Islam's racial universalism, Persia has always had a heterogeneity that might surprise some visitors. In general a very good-looking people, Iranians tend to smile a lot and treat strangers with unusual warmth (not that they treat each other any differently). One sees the full range of facial hair on Iranian men, with the most luxuriant growth reserved for the most pious; the Iranian president usually sports a few days growth of beard, like the younger of today's Hollywood heart-throbs.

As Fatemeh Keshavarz points out:

"Many are neither particularly religious/revolutionary, anti-revolutionary, nor for or against the West. Most love their country, respect other people's beliefs, do not support extremism or war, and love to see a democratic system that respects culture and tradition continue to develop in Iran. They complain about the unequal distribution of power in the world...The will not be co-opted, bribed, labeled, intimidated, accused, or made to disappear. They go about living a quiet, humane, honorable life: no one gets to hear about them because they do not write slogans on the wall or attach bombs to themselves."

One can scarcely overestimate the importance of the fact that more than half of the Iranian population is now under the age of nineteen, and almost 100% literate, an achievement of Iran's current government not often highlighted in press accounts. (The higher education system in Iran consists of 54 state universities and 42 state medical schools where tuition, room and board are totally free. Public funding also goes to 289 private universities.) The youth are awake, aware and plugged-in. Despite highly-developed governmental filtering systems, Iranians can boast an internet use rate per capita that is higher than that of China, Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia, ten times that of Cuba, and 100 times greater than Iraq or Afghanistan (per OpenNet Initiative). Donna Jo Napoli, the Swarthmore professor who visited Iran, wrote:

"Iran is a country of orality. Songs live. And the storytelling tradition lives. People say whatever they think, freely, to each other and to strangers. Taxi drivers often disseminate the daily news as they maneuver through traffic. The Internet quickly spreads the word. The press, however, is not free; but it hardly matters. Iranians are wired. They walk the streets glued to their cell phones. They check their computers often. They turn on their satellite TV’s."

According to the new book by Nasrin Alavi We Are Iran: the Persian Blogs, there are incredibly now at least 64,000 blogs written in the Persian language – more than in Spanish, Chinese or Russian. This count (from the NITLE Blog Census in 2004) does not include Iranian blogs done in English, or blogs and websites maintained by the highly-educated Iranian diaspora (there are scores of elaborate websites maintained by the Iranian-American community). In fact, her figure may be quite seriously out-of-date; more recently, the Open Net Initiative estimated 400,000 blogs in Persian (citing a report by E’temad-e Melli, “Iran press activists oppose regulation of websites, weblogs,” January 2, 2007, referenced in BBC Monitoring International Reports). One can imagine that it has increased geometricaly in the years since 2007.

New York Times reporter Thomas L. Friedman assessed the potentially profound generational factor this way in June of 2006:

"[Iran has] a bomb that is ticking away under Iranian society and over the next decade it will explode in ways that will change the face of this Islamic Republic. It's called here, for short, 'The Third Generation.'

Author Thomas Friedman

"The first generation of Iranian revolutionaries overthrew the Shah in 1979 and founded the Islamic Republic. They are now old, gray and increasingly tired, a clerical regime clinging to power more by coercion than by any popular acceptance of their plan to Islamize all aspects of Iranian life. The second generation came of age during the 1980's Iran-Iraq War, which left 286,000 Iranians dead and 500,000 injured. This is a lost generation, deflated and quiescent.

"The third generation are [sic] those Iranians from 16 to 30 who have come of age entirely under Islamic rule. They never knew the Shah's despotism. They have known only the ayatollahs'. There are now 18 million of them – roughly a third of Iran's population – and they include 2 million university students and 4 million recent university grads.

"...Where this Third Generation wants to go is already apparent. While some of them are religious conservatives, most are not. They are young, restless, modern-looking and often unemployed, because there are not enough good jobs.

"...This Third Generation of Iranians is quite different from its counterpart in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is a country getting younger, poorer, more Islamic and more anti-American – as young Saudis react against what they consider a corrupt, irreligious, pro-American regime. Iran is a country getting younger, poorer, less Islamic and less anti-American – as young Iranians react against an anti-American theocracy, isolating them from the rest of the world.

"...The Third Generation will eventually find a new political horse to ride and, when it does, Iran will change – with or without the ayatollahs' blessings."

People in our part of the world do not have a monopoly on maturity, morality or wisdom. It is not Iran has that has alarming rates of illegitimate birth, divorce, murder and rape, but our own society. As Daniel D. Perlmutter wrote, even “To use words from one culture to describe the activities of another is always a political act.”

Post #155 - Which of these is not like the others? (Trick question)

(I don't usually comment on the daily news feed.  But then, some days we are...force fed.)

The Traveler

He wonders, what did I do wrong? Should I have realized that this was a risky time, what with all the threats coming out of Tehran and Washington? Should I have postponed my trip, even though my aunt in Isfahan is not getting any younger and may not be around much longer? Was there something wrong in the way I answered their questions in the windowless side room at Imam Khomeini Airport? Would it have been any different had I flown into Mehrabad? A thousand questions, in order to avoid asking the only important question: Will I make it home alive?

The Interrogator

He does not like this job, but it is a job. Most of the young men in his family are unemployed, even the ones with university degrees. It could be worse; he could be one of the guys who work in the back end of Evin Prison, the ones who can use (in fact, who are encouraged to use) any technique they can think up -- just like in the old days under the Shah. But still, his job is boring and tedious. The "right" answers rarely come, nor are they necessarily required, if the bosses decide to proceed with a prosecution. At least he is serving the Revolution, which seems to be getting off track lately.

The Motorcylist

He throttles down, partly to avoid having his wheels catch the edge of the joob (a open drainage ditch bedside the roadway, sometimes 5 feet deep), partly so not to alert their target. He approaches the car, parked beside an apartment building in North Tehran. His companion readies the device, so that it can be affixed to the car's side panel, just behind the driver's side door, and they can roar away before anyone in the car or on the street has time to react. They will be out of blast range at the crucial moment, ideally with no one having gotten a good look at them.

The Scientist

He thinks about the meetings he has scheduled for the afternoon, about going home to have lunch with his wife. He will change out of his office trousers and into comfortable, pajama-bottom-like shalvor, while she brings his tea -- served in a small glass, accompanied by the irregular lumps of sugar called qand. He will place the qand behind his teeth and sip the hot, flavorful tea through it. They will talk about the children, how they're doing in school. He hears a slight "click" on the side of the car, before he hears nothing...ever again.

The Marine

He feels oddly ecstatic, though he's not sure whether it is their victory in the skirmish, or just the fact that he's alive, when he didn't necessarily expect to be. Though buoyed by the "win," he's also still jittery, hopped up on battle adrenalin. And, there is the bitter rage that bubbled up inside him when he saw his bunkmate get it in the head, not eight feet from where he was crouched. Taking a leak has always been "the pause that refreshes" but it never felt as good as this. Take that, he murmurs, as a crooked smile splits his face.

The Talib

He looks down on his now-useless earthly body, which he had put so much effort into building up. Now, he is beyond being surprised by anything that human beings might do. Still, it doesn't feel right, to see the khareji, the foreigners, desecrating the body that Allah had given him to use. He wonders whether his family members will see the pictures the other young man is taking. He muses about what his brothers in Islam will do when they see it. They will take offense, he knows. They may be energized by this new insult to our honor. It may lead to more killing.

Comprehension Quiz

Which of these is a child of God?

0 The Traveler

0 The Interrogator

0 The Motorcylist

0 The Scientist

0 The Marine

0 The Talib

0 All of the above