The Badger Herald

OPINION & EDITORIAL

Moderate speech a must in Middle East

Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.

Also by Mike Skelly:

Burger Boat Co. contract latest sign of troubled system (February 8, 2006)
Bush opposition needs backbone (October 31, 2006)
Cartoon uproar bad for Islam, West (February 16, 2006)
Potential withdrawal imperils Iraqis (November 21, 2006)
Virginia police cross line (February 22, 2006)

by Mike Skelly

Thursday, September 14, 2006

Last week, Iran dropped an unexpected bomb on the United States. Luckily, instead of one of the nuclear ones it is developing, this one was composed solely of words.

In a speech at Harvard, Mohammed Khatami, the former two-term president of Iran, made a strong denouncement of Osama bin Laden and suicide bombings, in addition to extolling the concept of democracy. In his remarks, Khatami described the events of Sept. 11 as "barbarous," and went on to say that he was against bin Laden, "first, because of the crimes he conducts and second, because he conducts them in the name of Islam, the religion which is a harbinger of peace and justice." While most of his remarks could be viewed positively, Khatami also expressed support for groups like Hezbollah, which he said countered Israeli colonialism and he said that the United States has been pursuing "world domination."

Even though his tenure as president may be over, Khatami's remarks signify an important step toward moderation in the Middle East. As an important figurehead from a country that is largely at odds with the United States, Khatami represents an authentic and genuine voice. The strength of his remarks lies not with the fact that he is the first to express these ideas since this is certainly not the first time someone from the region has made similar sentiments, and there are many that share coinciding beliefs. The importance of the speech is that the person responsible for the ideas is the former head of what is now a hard-line Islamic theocracy. As such, it would be difficult for even the most radical of extremists to paint Khatami as a puppet of the West and someone not in tune with the people of the Middle East.

What is disturbing about the remarks is that they display the consistently negative attitude of Middle Eastern governments toward Israel. The summarily dismissive and hostile attitude toward Israel continues to portend regional instability. This is due to the inability of many of the Middle Eastern governments to remain impartial observers when Israel is concerned — for instance, not criticizing the aggressive actions of Hezbollah's kidnapping of Israeli soldiers and the role that action played in the recent conflict between the two. Israel could play a large part in the democratization of the Middle East, but other governments must soften their stance toward Israel. And leaders, such as Khatami, should be careful to not reinforce pre-existing biases.

The hopeful result of these remarks will be a growing disenchantment with Osama bin Laden, radical Islam and their actions. The United States should encourage strong moderate voices like Khatami's in the Middle East to speak out against radical forces, even if those voices, like Khatami's are not expressly in support of the United States. For there to be true stability in the region, and thus for U.S. interests to be protected in the future, the United States must realize that it needs to allow organic democratic support to realize itself. This is certainly much easier said than done, considering the current predicament. Yet, for the region to realize long-term stability, there must be an internally created process that moves Middle Eastern nations toward their own form of democratic governance, rather than one imposed upon them by foreign powers. The formation of government through these external forces creates more space for turmoil, as those that oppose democracy can use the issue of foreign interference as a wedge in the process.

While Khatami's speech is an encouraging sign of moderation from governmental actors in the Middle East, for there to be actual change in the region, more support from the citizens is required to create the widespread ideological reforms necessary to stabilize the region.

Mike Skelly (meskelly@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in finance and political science.

Feedback

Show all comments

Hide anonymous comments

Anonymous (September 14, 2006 @ 8:13am):

This brand of willing naivete on stilts would be alarmingly amusing if it weren't so disarmingly dangerous.

Academics should begin familiarizing themselves with the Islamo-fascist concept of "taqiyah" or dissimulation.
http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/JR/Future/ch16_understanding_dishonesty.htm

Afterall, you're discussing the man who founded Hezbollah and orchestrated the mass murder of American peace-keepers in Beirut.

Yesterday, Khatami used Harvard's podium to justify his country's use of capital punishment for acts of homosexuality, but said that the conditions for execution are so strict that they are "virtually impossible to meet."

"Homosexuality is a crime in Islam and crimes are punishable," Khatami said. "And the fact that a crime could be punished by execution is debatable."

The audience responded... with silence to his remark.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=514170

The subject of the lecture was "Ethics of Tolerance in the Age of Violence."
http://gayorbit.net/?p=2459

Anonymous (September 14, 2006 @ 9:52am):

Submit or die, there's no third way.

***

These interpretations state clearly without any chance for confusion what the attitude toward non-Muslims must be; either convert them to Islam, or force them to pay the Jizya (tax/tribute) or it is war and of course the idea of peaceful coexistence and mutual respect based on equality does not exist, neither do peace treaties. What exists instead is Hudna (temporary cease-fire) which ends once enough power to fight and/or eliminate the enemy is gained.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110008928

Anonymous (September 14, 2006 @ 12:26pm):

Mr. Skelly seems the sort who might have stood in Jonestown, grasped his cup, taken a drink of the Kool Aid and then noted how fine and fruity it tasted, allthewhile oblivious to the larger reality of the situation.

-Victor Blake Marx

Anonymous (September 14, 2006 @ 12:29pm):

"Submit or die, there's no third way."

That's basically what America is saying to the Middle East. Submit to our informal colonization, submit to our economy, or we'll invade you and bomb your children.

Anonymous (September 14, 2006 @ 1:57pm):

That's basically what America is saying to the Middle East?

I see. Allowing them to craft their own constitution, vote for their own leadership, run their own economy, maintain their own security, worship in their own way... that's clearly in total moral equivalence with Islamo-fascism's demand to convert or face beheading.

I'm sorry, but not since Princeton Professor Peter Singer explained that we should give as good as we get from dogs who hump our legs, have I been so exasperated with the way pseudo-intellectual Leftists think they should use their head for a colonoscopy and then crab-walk across the public stage of academia expecting folks to think their new hats make them look smart. And, as with Professor Singer's efforts to get pet stores to carry Viagra, I have a very hard time taking Leftists seriously anymore; because I'm not sure taking them seriously helps anybody.

Anonymous (September 14, 2006 @ 2:46pm):

"That's basically what America is saying to the Middle East. Submit to our informal colonization, submit to our economy, or we'll invade you and bomb your children."

You crack me up.
Where did you get your labotomy?