Wait-and-see with Iran's bittersweet democracy
Harry Zollars
Issue date: 6/24/09 Section: Opinion
The fruits of democracy are as juicy, bitter and rancid as a spoiled blood orange. When an election, much like for the position of president in Iran, is not unanimous or won by a 60 percent margin, it must be rigged.
Not that I'm agreeing with the "re-elected" president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose government is known to sway proceedings in favor of the clerics. What I am saying is that we are in a delicate state of affairs equivalent to the Cuban Missile Crisis. If we and the rest of the world make the wrong move, then we may end up in an even worse state. This isn't appeasement of Ahmadinejad's actions. It's being cautious.
So how can we make things better by throwing a wrench in this situation? Mostly GOP members are calling for action in what is perhaps the most delicate situation in the new millennium. It's like asking to walk directly into Havana in the 60s and saying they must move their weapons. There are unwritten paths we all must take so that we don't endanger the entire world.
Also, who are we to say that another country's election was fixed? Yes, there is an enormous uprising in the streets of Tehran, and the reaction of the government is too much for what is a simple protest. But how does that allow us the right to not just "meddle," but take control of the situation?
We tried that with Iraq and succeeded at establishing a democracy, but at a great cost to our finances and our relationship with the rest of the world. Iraq is not Iran, and even our solutions don't necessarily solve others' problems.
We do not need a war the likes of which this world has never seen.
I agree with what President Obama has said in these past couple of weeks in that we should have a cautious concern in our relations with Iran. The aftermath from this one election is shocking and unbelievable.
However, with face after face flashing before our eyes and tirade after tirade, we have to realize that this isn't our fight.
Making it our fight is a road that will be even more crooked and rocky than our last eight years. As hard as it is to swallow, our best move is to stay on the sidelines and wait until there is too much to bear. We have a high tolerance, such as in the cases of Iraq, Darfur, and the Balkans.
Just because they have weapons doesn't make their bloodshed more valuable and our future less secure.
Not that I'm agreeing with the "re-elected" president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose government is known to sway proceedings in favor of the clerics. What I am saying is that we are in a delicate state of affairs equivalent to the Cuban Missile Crisis. If we and the rest of the world make the wrong move, then we may end up in an even worse state. This isn't appeasement of Ahmadinejad's actions. It's being cautious.
So how can we make things better by throwing a wrench in this situation? Mostly GOP members are calling for action in what is perhaps the most delicate situation in the new millennium. It's like asking to walk directly into Havana in the 60s and saying they must move their weapons. There are unwritten paths we all must take so that we don't endanger the entire world.
Also, who are we to say that another country's election was fixed? Yes, there is an enormous uprising in the streets of Tehran, and the reaction of the government is too much for what is a simple protest. But how does that allow us the right to not just "meddle," but take control of the situation?
We tried that with Iraq and succeeded at establishing a democracy, but at a great cost to our finances and our relationship with the rest of the world. Iraq is not Iran, and even our solutions don't necessarily solve others' problems.
We do not need a war the likes of which this world has never seen.
I agree with what President Obama has said in these past couple of weeks in that we should have a cautious concern in our relations with Iran. The aftermath from this one election is shocking and unbelievable.
However, with face after face flashing before our eyes and tirade after tirade, we have to realize that this isn't our fight.
Making it our fight is a road that will be even more crooked and rocky than our last eight years. As hard as it is to swallow, our best move is to stay on the sidelines and wait until there is too much to bear. We have a high tolerance, such as in the cases of Iraq, Darfur, and the Balkans.
Just because they have weapons doesn't make their bloodshed more valuable and our future less secure.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
JShaw
Jordan Shaw
posted 6/24/09 @ 1:57 PM CST
You're right to point out the need for caution, Harry. As a bystander who doesn't watch any political shows, I have to come at this from the only perspective that makes sense to me: Social control. (Continued…)
Adam H
posted 6/26/09 @ 3:42 PM CST
We've tried "social maneuvering" in the early 1950s in Iran. The government was eventually overthrown in 1953 and fueled a hatred for the West for the decades to come when the Iranian government was overthrown again in 1979 and replaced by the current Islamic Republic. (Continued…)
Post a Comment