A Few Thoughts On Iran Perception As The Stars Begin To Fall

6
728

As the missiles began to fall yesterday afternoon NZ time, I was struck by a few observances. Both of how much some things had changed – and, within those, how much yet disappointingly remained the same.

Almost seventeen years ago, in 2003, we gathered at high school to watch opening salvos of the American invasion of Iraq on a tv set up in the library.

Today, we are watching missile salvos over Iraq again … only this time, we are doing so largely via twitter and other forms of regularly updated online media.

Partially, it is because the televised broadcast has gone the way of the wireless radio-set (upon one of which, The Rev. Rolinson still recalls our proudly French forebear listening with sadness and then announcing that Dien Ben Phu had fallen as the high-water mark of another country’s out-of-time imperialist programme). And partially, it is because you find out so much more by going off and hunting out primary sources and secondary commentary out there in the wilds of the internet than you ever do simply watching and awaiting for special television bulletins or the 6 o’clock news.

Which does not, of course, mean that it’s assured to be more correct than what is visible via official channels – but given the nature of some of the stuff either turning up twisted upon them, or worse, not turning up at all, it doesn’t necessarily mean you’re much the worse off, either.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

One prominent example of all of this ‘in motion’ concerns the character and the dispositions and the deeds of the figure at the heart of all of this. Major General Qassem Soleimani – now eternally of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

You read a lot of newspapers, see a lot of public newscasts quoting American politicians or talking heads, and you start to come away with one, overwhelming and throbbing impression. That even if you’re not wild about another American fireworks-display-into-fire-out-of-handling in the Middle East, that the guy was somehow monstrously “evil”. Yet it goes further!

The perverse alchemy of ‘official narratives’ is plainly visible in the way in which a man who had spent much of the 1990s fighting the Taliban, and much of the past decade fighting ISIS and otherwise pushing back against Saudi-emanated objectionable forces (including Al Qaeda franchises I can think of in at least three countries offhand) …

… is now attacked and castigated as a “terrorist”, and some kind of latter-day Osama bin Laden. [I had somewhat less overt sympathy for Saddam, but the man found himself afflicted by a similar downright pernicious no doubt intentional mislabeling. He, too, had spent years opposing many of the same forces as the Americans, and had directly offered to assist after both 9/11 and the 1993 World Trade Center bombing in fighting back against Al Qaeda – none of which stopped him being linked in press reports and in Presidential rhetoric to exactly those terrorists aforementioned. Gosh, it’s almost like some words have meanings that simply convey “you’re supposed to actively hate that guy”, and little more.]

Now, “terrorist”, to be sure, does not simply mean “Sunni extremist” … but, then, it certainly does not just mean “person incongruent with the active extension of the power and agenda of America And Friends ™”.

As Malcolm X once put it – “If you’re not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”

And that is only one of a few areas in which the strange radioactivity of embedded mis-perceptions can be observed making itself known in relation to Iran in recent days.

Ever since the footage started coming out of … literally thousands upon thousands upon thousands of people being pretty outraged by Soleimani’s death, I have noticed this small but pert attempted push-back, predominantly from persons of a ‘certain age’, insisting that the whole thing has to be staged.

And while I can understand thinking that massive demonstrations which happen to be pretty politically and optically potent might be staged (after all, you just have to look back at some of the trick photography and such utilized in some recent Anglosphere events) … I suspect rather strongly that there is something else going on here.

Several days ago we heard from a wise Iranian cleric who asked who the equivalent figure to Soleimani was in Western culture … whom the Iranians could kill and have it carry a similar resounding impact in all of our collective psyche (“…Spongebob?”), noting that almost all the modern-day ‘heroes’ of the West are made up, and highly animated only in the two-dimensional sense (possibly involving a Korean sweat-shop).

Well, not only was he right about that, but he also gave voice to just why some people frequently (yet not always) ‘of a certain age’ and/or political disposition are having such great difficulty grasping that actually, yeah, a lot of Iranians, Shi’ites elsewhere in the world, and other people entirely are annoyed about what has occurred and have been actively expressing and demonstrating their feeling upon the matter.

I do not intend to turn this into a fully-blown lecture-discursion upon the Disenchantment of the World, but it could be fairly suggested that this minority of disbelieving is perhaps symptomatic of growing up in an era wherein the last time something like that happened in the Anglosphere West was Beatlemania.

To mash up Grettir’s Saga and Nietzsche:

“BARE IS THE BACK OF THE MYTHLESS MAN”

Also, speaking of ‘myths’ [here, somewhat, in the sense directly opposite to that in which I more usually mean it … ], take a look at Netanyahu earlier in the week.

If there is one thing that Netanyahu is (and there are .. many), it is a survival expert. That a man such as he who has spent quite some effort attempting to stir up fear of Iran in recent years, would be backpeddling frantically and attempting to put distance between his country and the killing of Soleimani … I think that it speaks volumes as to the actual realities of the situation.

In specia, serving to undercut somewhat the illusory “all be home by Christmas” mis-thusiasm being put forward by the principle instigators of this now-escalating conflict safely ensconced all the way over on the other side of the Atlantic.

That, too, was the hubristic attitude which characterized the previous American adventurism in this region, also on trumped up charges against an “Ira-” country, almost deliberately flouting international law and norms, and to general opposition from experts and ordinaries across the globe.

All of which has me reaching for Marx’s well-worn quip that:

“Hegel remarks somewhere that all great world-historic facts and personages appear, so to speak, twice. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.”

6 COMMENTS

    • Tim Leadbeater: I read that link. Christ….. surely you don’t believe that stuff?

      Look at the English; look at who purports to have written it.

      I advise a great deal more scepticism: we’ve been conned by this sort of thing before.

      Note: I looked her up. This is what I found:

      “Dr. Hawzhin Azeez is a Kurdish academic, activist, poet, and intersectional feminist from Southern Kurdistan (north Iraq). Born during the first Gulf War between Iran-Iraq (1980-1988) her political identity was heavily framed by her early experiences of war, particularly the state sponsored terrorism against the Kurds both under the Saddam regime as well as the newly emerged Islamic Republic of Iran.”

      And: she’s based in Australia! Well, of COURSE she is. I don’t think that we should consider her as having any more credibility on the contemporary situation in Iran than anyone else fulminating from outside the ME.

      • I’d advise that you do a bit more reading and look up people such as Sam Hamad, Yassin al-Haj Saleh, Leila Al-Shami and Robin Yassin-Kassab. These are people from the region itself, with an organic and living connection to the struggles taking place there. If we don’t take care to listen to these voices, we are susceptible to lies. Whitewashing butchers like Sulaimani does not help the cause.

    • Blood of tens of thousands? Even if it were true there is no comparison the the blood of millions courtesy of the USA’s efforts around the globe.
      You need to expand your information sources if you want to have any credibility also.

  1. Tim Leadbeater: “I’d advise that you do a bit more reading…”

    Ha! I’ve been around for a while. I’ve been paying attention to events in the ME for a large chunk of my longish life. I’ve heard it all before.

    Over all those years, we’ve been systematically propagandised by the west, in particular the US. Story after story turns out to have been propaganda at the least, outright lies at the worst. Hence my scepticism at the link you posted.

    With regard to the Kurds: Kurdish nationalists have territorial claims on most of the important ME states – Syria, Iraq, Iran and Turkey – so any time one of those states is causing trouble for America, the Kurds can be activated to cause trouble in return.

    Case in point:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_Kurdish_rebellion_in_Iran

    Kurds aren’t universally liked in that part of the world, not least because of their involvement in the Armenian genocide, along with their part in the persecution of the Pontic Greeks and the Assyrians. Their attempt to steal Syrian oil hasn’t won them many friends either.

    I also tend to be sceptical of talk about “Assadism”: it sounds like propaganda to me.

    Your post left the impression that the assassination of Soleimani was somehow justified on the basis of his characterisation as a “butcher”.

    Working on that principle, there is a long line of western leaders who’d qualify for the same characterisation, and the same fate. That would include pretty much all US presidents in my lifetime.

    Except, as it happens, possibly Jack Kennedy. And the incumbent. Though during Trump’s time in the WH, Washington has slapped sanctions up the wazoo on multiple countries. And – as many of us know full well – sanctions can be as deadly as bullets, though they usually take a bit longer.

  2. The guy seems to have been a total bastard and food riddance.
    But that doesn’t mean I agree with Trump’s actions.
    I for one think this will all blow over pretty quickly.
    Trump got to show his base.how tough he is during the lead up to the election and Iran was seen tin respond in a way that didn’t actually further provoke the US.

Comments are closed.