An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Neocons and Ahmadinejad: Perfect Together

Jeanne Carstensen has an absolute must-read Salon interview with Hooman Majd, a leading Iranian intellectual who grew up “mainly in the United States,” and who, in Carstensen’s words, is “the consummate insider and outsider.”

“A friend once told me that I was the only person he knew who was both 100 percent American and 100 percent Iranian,” writes Hooman Majd in his book on Iranian culture, “The Ayatollah Begs to Differ: The Paradox of Modern Iran.”

The consummate insider and outsider, Majd served as the English-language translator for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s now infamous 2006 speech at the United Nations, and also wrote about the experience for the New York Observer.

The son of an Iranian diplomat under the shah, and grandson of a powerful ayatollah, Majd grew up mainly in the United States where he worked for many years in the entertainment industry before launching his career as a journalist and author. Although openly linked with the reformists — he wore green Iranian slippers on Bill Maher’s program last week and has also translated for former President Mohammed Khatami (to whom he is related by marriage) — Majd’s views on Iran are distinguished by their nuance and fierce independence. Indeed, in his status as a sophisticated global citizen and Iranian American sympathetic to the core ideals of the Islamic Republic, he embodies the paradox of contemporary Iran that is the subject of his book.

Majd was in Iran in April for a recent Newsweek cover story about his journey from his ancestral home of Yazd through the Iranian heartland to the sprawling capital city of Tehran. He returned again in May during the run-up to the elections and has since been in daily contact with friends and family about the crisis in the country from his home in New York City.

Salon spoke to Majd (who has been a regular contributor to these pages) by phone about whether or not the Ahmadinejad victory was rigged (yes), what reform candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi really wants (Islamic democracy), and why the neocons are Ahmadinejad’s best friend.

That’s the introduction. The Q&A interview follows. Read it all.

Added: “The Three Stooges of Ahmadinejad” are at it again.

  • adesnik
    It's interesting that Majd criticizes neoconservatives for their ignorance of Iran, yet ventures to make such remarkably uninformed observations about American politics.

    He says: "If we come out on the side of the reformers and say we can't accept Ahmadinejad, it would be the equivalent of Iran saying we can't accept that Bush is president because we don't agree with the Supreme Court ruling."

    There is no comparison between an election decided by a legitimate court (regardless of the quality of its decision) and an "election" whose results have to be improsed through fraud and violence.

    Majd's comments about neoconservatives (as well as the implied approval of this post) are deeply problematic. Especially on a centrist website dedicated to civil discussion, we need to rise above simplistics associations of neocons and Ahmadinejad.

    Majd actually misunderstands the neocon position. The serious neocon concern is that if Mousavi won but Khameini retained effective power, the US and Europe would mistake Mousavi's moderation for the actual intentions of the regime. That is a serious point you can agree with or debate. Majd's suggestion that the neocons just want someone "to demonize" is ill-informed.
  • JSpencer
    Uh... regarding the "quality" of that court decision:

    The decision in the Florida election case may be ranked as the single most corrupt decision in Supreme Court history, because it is the only one that I know of where the majority justices decided as they did because of the personal identity and political affiliation of the litigants. This was cheating, and a violation of the judicial oath. ~ Alan Dershowitz

    I'm not happy with the idea that anyones comfort level with that decision is based primarily on party affiliation, but it seems to be the case, both with the justices themselves, and the citizenry at large. Was the "rigging" as blatant when compared to the Iran "election"? No, but if the result compromised our fair election system, then grounds for comparison aren't so terribly far-fetched.
  • Don Quijote
    an "election" whose results have to be improsed through fraud and violence.


    How do you know that?

    For all you know, Ahmadinejad may have won fair and square...
  • kathykattenburg
    Actually, Majd does say that Ahmadinejad has a good amount of support in Iran, and he very well may have won, but it's the size of the win that's fraudulent.
  • eejays
    Iran is not just Tehran, where of course Mosavi got a big support. But had Rafsanjani not sided with mosavi, he was unlikely to get even the half of current votes.
  • Anna
    I interpreted it as Majd saying that all the bombastic rhetoric (and past actions vis-a-vis Iraq) that comes from the neocons plays directly into the hands of Khamenei and Ahmadinejad. The neocons seem not to realize (or care) that Iranians are a very nationalistic people and their rhetoric is the perfect distraction for the leadership to toss out to the people. I have a hunch that had it been a President McCain making the the less-than-measured remarks (compared to Obama's) that's he's been making as Senator McCain, there's a decent chance that the protests and any divisions in Iranian leadership could've been papered over by uniting everyone against the "interlopers" of the West (interlopers in quotes since we obviously wouldn't have had any direct involvement in Iran's elections under McCain or Obama). McCain's rhetoric could quite possibly have made it easier for Iranians to buy the (IMO desperate) attempt of the Iranian leadership to paint the US as meddling whereas Obama's rhetoric makes it harder for them to buy into.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC