|
|
 |
The Mood of the Muslim Street
// Clashes Among Civilizations Replacing Dialog in Iran
For the last two decades, philosophers and political scientists have been despairingly asking whether there will be a clash of civilizations or whether there is still room for dialog. The main opponent of Samuel Huntington's ideology of the clash of civilizations was Iranian Preisdent Mohammad Khatami, who instead advanced the theory of the dialog of civilizations. The kindly Iranian professor in the president's chair dispelled European fears; the West, of course, was concerned about Islamists, Arab terrorists, Talibs, and the spectre of Islamic revolution, but Iran was not high on the list of Europe's worries. It was commonly believed that the country was finally on the high road to democracy and that it had no further intention of coming to blows with Western civilization.
Mohammad Khatami's vague speeches had no effect at all on Iranian politics, since the role of the president in the Iranian government is not overly important. But he appealed to the Europeans, who carried on "a critical dialog" with him while developing Iranian oil fields and occasionally grumbling about human rights violations in Iran.
The idyll was rudely shattered when the theory of the dialog of civilizations ceased to satisfy Iran's spiritual authorities, who after all are the real force behind the throne. Once Khatami's pseudoliberalism had lost its popularity with the people and disenchanted the voters, the ayatollahs in Tehran decided to rally and mobilize the masses by exchanging a gentle hand for a harsh one and liberalism for radicalism. The former course was not declared false, just exhausted and in need of a quick replacement, and as a result all of the principles on which Iran's official foreign policy ideology was based came up for review. The "dialog" of civilizations was junked and replaced with "clash," and as the herald of new things to come appeared a previously little-known politician named Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
All of the West's fears that were so thoroughly assuaged by Mohammad Khatami reappeared with a vengeance as the official face of Iran took the line "the worse, the better." Do you suspect Iran of intending to create an atomic bomb? Then we'll speed up the development of our nuclear program. Are you accusing Iran of hating Israel? Let's have a contest featuring cartoons about the Holocaust. Are you worried about Iran's energy policies? Okay, we'll join with Russia to create a gas cartel.
Such a rhetorical about-face is tied to the fact that the Iranian authorities have completely changed the audience that they intend to reach with their efforts. Previously it was considered a priority to calm Western public opinion. Now the Iranian authorities have given up on Europe and the US and have realized that the main audience for their pep talks is in Muslim countries. By saying alternately that civilizations are already clashing and that such clashes will bring bigger benefits than dialog would have, the Iranian authorities have begun to consolidate opinions around the new ideology of the Muslim street. And to scare the Europeans. The Islamic world will be over the moon to see an "Islamic atomic bomb," and Europe is scared of a "gas OPEC." So both are in the service of the same goal.
Mikhail Zygar
All the Article in Russian as of Jan. 30, 2007
|
|
|
