The Change The Americans Did (Guest Voice)

November 15th, 2008
By JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief

Print Print

So how does the election of Barack Obama look to people outside the United States — particularly, how does it look to a young Iranian living in Iran? In this Guest Voice post, Iranian freelance writer and blogger Kourosh Ziabari looks at how the U.S was perceived in some parts of the world under President George Bush and what Obama’s election could mean. TMV runs Guest Voice posts of various viewpoints. Guest Voice posts do not necessarily reflect the opinion of TMV or its writers.

The Change The Americans Did

by Kourosh Ziabari

“It’s been a long time coming, but tonight, because of what we did on this day, in this election, at this defining moment, change has come to America.”

Among the noisy hollers of the jubilant, excited swarm in Chicago gathered to celebrate the official announcement of President-elect Barack Obama’s victory over old-hand Sen. John McCain after the 21 month 2008 US Presidential election campaign, yells of “Yes, we can” by the excited, hopeful Americans raised the expectations for a defining four years under a moderate 47-year old who is said to be going to alleviate the flames of hostility and animosity blazed by President Bush worldwide. Bush was seen by many as a warmonger.

Almost everyday during the past 8 years while Republican George Walker Bush held office in the White House, you could probably hear up-to-date, breaking news regarding a raid by the US Air Forces or military troops on diverse parts of the world, one after another. The sacrificed victims included Rwanda, Somalia, Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq who experienced the catastrophic situation of their territorial integrity being violated, while the others such as Belarus, Uzbekistan, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Venezuela, China, Russia, North Korea and Iran underwent the worst types of soft-strikes: financial embargo and psychological war.

Perhaps, that was the impact of Bush’s foreign policy to cut the mutual ties off with the entire world – except Western Europe. Some believe this was to meet Israel’s ambitions and accomplish an ideological mission to expand global Judaism. Whatever the mission, it cost the White House and the nation of America a lot…

In the other words, US government hurt its relations with bunches of countries rashly, under the incumbency of President Bush; countries which he assumed were tiny, terrorist, unimportant or hostile. Meanwhile, he boosted connections with a small number of countries including UK, France, Germany and Israel as major allies to continue preserving what some considered to be the tyrannical stance of USA toward the rest of world.

The inimical posture toward the under-developing countries that make up about two thirds of world population’s, allowed the White House to take any military or financial measure against them whenever it considered it “necessary”, especially involving countries with Muslim majorities.That caused outrages and hatred against US among masses of people and led the country to be seen as a despotic tyranny in an age of freedom and democracy.

The public objections and irritations surged around Bush and his aides when the US outlandishly vetoed a UNSC resolution against Israel in November 2006 which had demanded the Jewish state to cease the slaughter of Palestinian women and children in Gaza Strip. Meanwhile, it imposed three rounds of strict sanctions against Iran to enforce Tehran suspend its enrichment of Uranium and relinquish the nuclear program which the IAEA 12 times said showed no proof or evidence of “deviation”.

Although the American media have known that Iran is facing an electricity shortage because of its high amount of exports, they conducted a boisterous and grim propaganda against Iran during the past 3 years and particularly intensified their strikes after the election of President Ahmadinejad who was reluctant toward the west and encouraged Iran to get closer to China and Russia than before.

Offensive and insulting language about Iran’s people, calling Iranian officials immoral terms, sticking the label of “terrorist” to the 70 million nation of Iran, perpetually, fabricating and distorting facts about the Persian cultural heritage and history, forging news and current events etc. were all the propaganda tactics that intercontinental media corporations used in an unprecedented alliance to prevent the emergence of a new superpower in Asia.

Thousands of international competitions, festivals, exhibitions and important events in the fields of sport, culture, politics, economy and science were toke place in Iran in the last 3 years, but neither FoxNews, nor BBC, nor CNN, nor AP, nor NY Times, nor Washington Post, nor EuroNews, nor France Press, nor FT Times, nor LA Times, nor PBS, nor ABC and in one word, none of the mainstream media spoke even a word about them and that showed clearly that how truthful they were towards Iran.

However, the major media companies such as News Corporation and Time Warner who always present themselves as independent and non-aligned to governments, began softening their approach toward Iran right after President-elect Obama’s victory was publicized.

The first step was to moderate the critical commentaries on President Ahmadinejad by praising him for the unprecedented congratulations letter to President-elect Obama on the advent of his victory.

Meanwhile, no one can anticipate the next steps and actions that the “decisive media” will take towards Iran, now that an unpredictable Democratic Senator is going to undertake the presidency of US.

But actually, it was evident from Sen. Obama’s first comments that a fundamental change of US policy toward Iran would be underway if he took office.

Also you would easily infer from the American people that they have not been satisfied with the antagonistic rhetoric of their statesmen about Iran during the last years too, because they believe Iranians are not totally comparable with Afghans, Arabs or other tribes in the region because of a 15,000 years civilization as their rich cultural backbone; maybe Iran was an effective factor that led to the historic triumph of Obama over his rival. Actually McCain was not the person who has been defeated; instead, the scope of Republicans’ notorious ideas was the main reason for their failure.

However, now that the “first black” is going to occupy the oval room of White House, everybody is waiting to observe an apparent transformation in the US foreign policy which should be free of what some in the world consider to be terror, genocide, mass killings and a
bullying stance.

Iranians comprise a major community in US where there are lots of Iranian-American half-blooded citizens and of course they would be among the main catalysts that force the cabinet of President Obama to apply some basic “metamorphosis” in his performance, rhetoric and approach toward Iran. Now nobody is expecting to hear the detailed news about the renewal of ineffective and ridiculous sanctions, or some threats about a possible attack on Iranian nuclear facilities….

Honestly, the era of sanctions and armed interventions has expired, specially about Iran which is the world’s 8th largest military power (According to CIA FactBook 2008) and wouldn’t be frightened by some psychological war of words by American statesmen.

Citizens, media, analysts, peace activists and international observers are now waiting for a constructive engagement between Iran and US particularly after some three rounds of negotiations between the two sides at the ambassadors level in Iraq –which was an indicator of the great potential of both countries to participate and to cooperate.


Among many other things, Kourosh Ziabari has appeared on the BBC outlook program and is a member of Stony Brook University Publications editorial board. His writings have been translated into Italian, German , Arabic, Spanish and Bulgarian and have been published on several websites and online magazines.




This entry was posted on Saturday, November 15th, 2008 at 11:26 am and is filed under Guest Contributor, Media, Israel, Media Criticism, Iran, Middle East. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 3 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    I had a dream, a vivid dream, that we will have some sort of conflict with Russia in their Kaliningrad outpost on or near Thursday March 19, 2009. They are frustrated with American aggression and see us as weak right now financially. In my dream they had legitimate beefs with us, but also they refused to see their own motivations as jealousy of American wealth (the ruling-class russians did) vs Russian financial struggling....as a petty agenda that wasn't truly born of defense of their home country totally. A backlash if you will.

    Of course, the conflict's roots were in oil, the control of oil, the grasping of oil...

    I would advise sitting down at the table with Russia and apologizing first for the Bush administration's impingement on the Middle East. Then I would advise coming to the table with a very detailed plan to withdraw not only troops from the Middle East, but our overuse and dependance on the oil there. The russians are right, we are demanding more than our fair share of that pie on the playground. If we demonstrated we could withdraw our need for so much, conflict will be avoided.

    Also, we must demonstrate to them and the world that we will hold BushCo culpable. It's as if their egos need this to feel vindicated for the wrongs perpetuated by the outgoing administration. I think if we do those two things: come to the table with alternative energy plan showing strategic "straw-withdrawel"..lol.. from Middle East reserves of crude, as well as strategic troop withdrawel and an across-the-table disarming of missiles on both sides of the border of Poland, AND the prosecution of those culpable in the Bush Administration, we will see a restoration of our world standing and the propogation of peace.

    Otherwise, put on your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

    *prepares to get called crazy and told to take meds.*

    Not kidding, I have these dreams only once in a great while. This one was very brilliant, very specific and went on all night long. I would wake up, roll over and the damn thing would start up exactly where it left off and continued for about 4 or five hours this way. I've had about half a dozen of these my whole life and every single one has come true to the letter.

    *prepares for more haranging*

    *ducks*

    I felt goofy writing this here, but I feel even more compelled as to what would happen if I didn't..? It's a strange feeling.. One I don't altogether like.. My reputation vs what will happen if I don't speak up. Well, what the hell. Nancy Reagan consulted a voodoo queen or whatever. I guess I could have a prophetic dream once in a blue moon?
    • ^
    • v
    Useless.

    We would like to hear a young Guest Voice from Iran who doesn't face government reprisal for his views. Unfortunately there are none.
    • ^
    • v
    Apparently the gentleman cited below, says whatever he feels like

    According to International Herald Tribune:
    http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/04/14/afric...

    Iran's most senior dissident cleric has lashed out at the country's ruling Islamic establishment, accusing it of imposing dictatorship and violating the rights of its people in the name of Islam.

    The 1979 Islamic revolution toppled Iran's former monarchy to bring freedom and end despotism, but that supposed liberation never happened, Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri said in comments released by his office.

    Montazeri is one of just a few Grand Ayatollahs — the most senior theologians of the Shiite Muslim faith.

    For a reality check on Iran, see
    http://www.bibijon.org/iranimage/
 
close Reblog this comment
blog comments powered by Disqus



By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.