My Emails with Iran

In this past week, I connected with two Iranian futurists based in Tehran who are fellow members in Shaping Tomorrow’s Foresight Network. In our first year we have grown to nearly 1,300 members, mostly professional futurists from all over the world.

I invited these two men to engage in a conversation with me given the posturing of our two governments in recent years and the growing tension and talk of invasion by the U.S. I found myself deeply touched when I learned last week they were familiar with my work. I’m known in Iran? I suspect my surprise was largely due to a complete misunderstanding of what the people and the country are like. After all, I have never been there and have only known FORMER citizens of Iran, or Persia as it was called in its past incarnation, and a relative handful at that. As an example of my ignorance, I hadn’t realized Iran is not a Arab country. They speak Farsi and English.

The conversation has just begun, only a couple of days now, but I can already see we have much to learn from one another. One of the men sent me two documents yesterday; one was a 2002 open letter to Americans which he translated for a student-friend of his. It pleads for a creative, conscious and wise approach to resolving conflict rather than the saber-rattling and blustery rhetoric by both governments. Here is a link to the Letter.

The other document was a white paper created by Israeli intelligence on the subject of Iranian cultural values, self-image and negotiation style. He thought that while Israelis may be most critical and judgmental of Iran, I would still find their assessment interesting and informative. Indeed, I did.

I have invited each of them to post here if they so choose and invite anyone else to comment on this entry for the month of May. 

Comments

[John Renesch]

Here's a link to Wikipedia's page on the Persian language: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_language

[Vahid]

John,

Conversation is indeed a much better approach to solving disputes. Apparently, the advent of the Internet is holding promises for both our nations to settle down major differences, most of them are based on misunderstandings. It seems that the time has come for us to put an end to this long and childish quarrel between the US and Iran. Although it may take time to proceed, I believe that, assuming patience, we can find our way out of this dooming jungle.

[JohnRenesch]

Indeeed, Vahid, and thanks again for the open letter and the Israeli white paper. It amazes me what actions we tolerate by our govenments when the people have no interest in such adolescent quibbling and posturing. So in addition to our common interest on getting along better we share this deference to our govenments as if they are like spoiled children we simply tolerate. But these "spoiled children" have the ability to start wars that could negatively impact whole societies.

At what point do we all say, enough is enough! Like a directive from a parent telling two squabbling siblings to settle their differences and stop bickering or face the consequences.

I think "we the people" often forget our governments are in power due to the legitimacy we give them. If we remove the power we give them, largely through our silence, they are simply servants of the people and, short of military repression, will either fall from power or comply with the people's will. That is how it is supposed to work here.

About half of my fellow Americans seem be willing to let things be because they are so preoccupied with their work, their lives and their "busy-ness", a troubling state of affairs for me.

How do you see the situation with the Iranian populace? Is it similar or different?

[Vahid]

It is interesting to note that the same story applies to the Iranian populace. Of course, not half of them but almost all of them are terribly busy earning money, paying back loans, dreaming about when they finally own a house, and etc. However, I tend to conclude, by my knowledge of the culture, that most of Iranian people are going to take hold of their future at the 90 minute. A soccer metaphor we are get to used which emphasizes a final hour decision and action by Iranian populace.

[JohnRenesch]

Vahid, do you mean that the Iranian people will allow only so much facing-off/saber-rattling and then get fed up and oust their govenment? Is this what you are saying will likely happen?

It seems both popluations have been allowing our respective governments to play an incredibly dangerous game, allowing war to become such a strong possibility, without objecting more vocally before this.

I'd love your take on this, Vahid.

[Vahid]

I think the Iranian people understand that the person who started this saber-rattling was President Bush not President Ahmadinejad. Therefore they do expect that the American people stop him before they stop the man inside the country. One also should take into account the bitter memory of the Iranian populace about the US true intentions. I presume that you know about the infamous drive of the White House to fight against the only democratic administration in Iran back in 1953, the time when "Operation Ajax" was plotted and run.

[JohnRenesch]

Yes, Vahid, I am aware of my country's interference with your nation's governance and apologize for our government's way of bullying others while "we the people" closed our eyes and now suddenly are becoming aware of the imperialist foreign policy we have allowed to foster since the end of World War II.

A friend of mine confessed to his role in this netharious activity when he wrote Confessions of an Economic Hit Man a couple of years ago. Have you seen it, or read it? The author's name is John Perkins.

[Vahid]

John, fortunately the US has a long tradition of self-criticism and this confession by an insider is truly informative. I'd love it if you send a copy of his book to my address. Although I enjoy many critical views that are being presented in the American media, especially in movies, the other side of this media dominance is that most of the American people overtrust their media, for instance, the CNN, the Fox news, etc. Without no doubt, currently the Americans' public opinion are soaked in whatever feeds they receive through this huge outlets, most of them are not necessarily providing the truth as it is, instead they approve and disseminate whatever as the White House and other lobbyist institutes would prefer. Needless to say that the same logic applies to Iran, perhaps more so. But both of our nations should be more active about their situational awareness.

[John Renesch]

Vahid, I suspect it isn't that the people TRUST the media as much as it is they allow themselvs to be spoon-fed. An TV anchor woman friend of mine says they've ceased investigative journalism and go for the "quick and easy" - taking stories off the wires rather that doing their own due dilgence...a matter of time and expesnes pressing all corporations.

Part of this problem is that U.S. news has come under the corporate mandate to be a profit center which has compromised the integrity of American media. It has also become more like tabloids, less like real news used to be a generation ago.

The media isn't necessarily being a mouthpiece for the White House but by failing to do their own investigations they are susceptible to spin and thus it appears as you say.

I will order you a copy of the Confessions book and have it mailed to you, Vahid, probably direct from the publisher who I know. Send me your mailing address BY EMAIL - not posted here.

I've asked Aziz to join in but haven't seen anything from him as yet.

[Aziz]

Hi John & Vahid,

I followed your topics of comments. It was facinating. I join from here in your discussion. I do believe that media are cooking the brains of people. We have brain washing in two forms, Eastern and Western. I was traveling to Australia couple of years ago and I met an Italian guy in Airplane and he was technical staff of Ferrari team. After he gave me a brief description of his job and his love of driving car, he asked where are you from?
I said, Iran, and he asked do you have Road in Iran for driving?!
He thought that we still living in tents and running hourses like two centuries ago. After this I realized how biased is the mind of western people and how they are suffering from biased medias.
It's the same for distingushing the muslims from Arabs. Many people in west countries (or non muslim countries) assum that all muslims are Arabs. They do not know that bigest muslim country in the world is Indonesia which is 4000 Km far from arab nations.
Anyway, There is big gap of understanding between nations, despite that people talking about globalisation.

Best, Aziz

[John Renesch]

Hello, Aziz....good to have you in the conversation!!

Our perceptions of each other are critical if we are to achieve any understanding of one another. This is so essential, especially when "official" relationships between countries become strained or challenging.

This is what prompted me to invite this conversation - to get to know someone from a country my government has labelled as "evil." What polarizing words!!

As I reflect on it, that wasn't my government; it was my President and his advisors. Like your President, Bush talks like a tough cowboy but doesn't represent the ideas or values of all Americans. Many of us can hardly wait for his term to expire and have a new person in the White House.

I suspect that your media portrays an image of the U.S. which is incomplete (and hence inaccurate) much like Western media portrays the Middle East. This is a big gap, Aziz.

Did either of you (Vahid or Aziz) watch the four hours of Pangea Day festiviites yesterday? It was a great example of how differences can be erased and our commonalities experienced so we can all get along. If you missed it you can still watch it from the archives at www.PangeaDay.org.

[Aziz]

John,
I am very glad to be involved in your conversation. let's continue...
In every country, government trys to gurantee his interests, sometimes called it national interests. Withinn one dimension of this concept, government trys to control the thoughts of his people and make a direction in the mind of the people that will be useful for him anytime he needs to defend himself or his interests. Media is their weapon and devise for brain washing. I believe that in my own country, people are less affected by governmental media. Because they have access to other information resources like satelite channels, Radios and so forth. I am not saying that these channels are saying truth, but they see the world from different perspective and making Iranian to think in other ways as well.Do you know that there are more than 30 Irannian channels in the air that broadcasting mostly from US and majority of Iranians are watching them everyday. Let's back to our most important topics.
In new age, there is emergent problem regarding the national interest. Now days, national interests of any country is not limited to its borders, but due to interconnections, there are many overlapping areas. It's very complicated and making decision for governors is very difficult. Any wrong decision in one area will have butterfly effects on the other areas. In my opinion, after 9/11, Mr. Bush and his team had started very complex and difficult project, called Greater Middle East. He and his advisors are trying to restructure the middle east according to their values (which is based on fundamental worldview of christianity). Right religious parties have big influence on them and pushing him and his team in this direction since he came on power. In my perspective there wasn't any great progress or achievment in this strategy. In this strategy every country that oppose those values are evil. At least they can show up a country like Iran as Evil in their media. It seems that they have sunk in the ocean of problems and it's very dangrous if they think that with creating one new problem they could get rid of the previous ones. Considering what is going on in the Lebanon, I am a little bit worry. Lebanon is one of the hottest overlapping area in the region.
What you think?

Best, Aziz

[John Renesch]

Aziz, you bring up what might be another possible commonality in how our countries perceive each other. Because of Bush and his ties to the fundamentalist Christian right, America could be seen as a theo/democracy of sorts. I suspect most Americans presume Iran is a fundamentalist Islamic theocracy.

Do you believe your President reflects the majority view of all Iranians? For instance, are they as opposed to the state of Israel and committed to obliterate it as he is (or at least as he says)? Do you have polls in your country that provide insights to public opinion?

[Aziz]

John,

I did not mean that Mr. Bush is reflecting the view of all American. I believe that the same thing is valid for Iranian case as well. I said Mr. Bush is getting more influences from religious right parties or Neo-cons.When you see Mr. Bush has categorised your country as "axes of Evil" , you think why this happened, despite that US politicians know that the only friendly people in Middle East are Iranians.
If you go to below link, you will see how muslim countries seeing US. Even in Turkey which is almost allianse of US, 83% of people do not like Americans.
http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=17636

In Iran we have not a mechanism of public opinion polling, or if we had, it's forbiden to be published. But if I want to do judgement about the popularity of US in Iran from my perspective, I would have given opposite percentage of Turkey.
One of the big problem in US government is that they do not distingiush Iranian people who living inside Iran from Iran's government. It's exactelly the same in Iran's government case.
But we have to make briedge between two nations to understand each other without giving space for intervention of governments.

[JohnRenesch]

Aziz, thanks for the link to the article. I will forward it to friends here in the states because I think it is valuable to see how the world views us. I suspect many will not take the time to read, however, since it seems we only invest study and deep reads when it comes to personal priorities...to this degree we are a selfish country. What's worse is we avoid self-examination....a sort of national hubris at work.

For instance, our foreign policy under Bush is following a blueprint created in 2000 by the neo-cons that's been available on the Web for years. Few Americans have taken the time to read it though or they'd be as outraged as I have been ever since I discovered it - before the Iraq invasion. I published the link in my newsletter back in 2002 and was amazed at how little conversation it stirred up. Here's the link: http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf .

I found it bone-chilling that my beloved country would be embarking upon a path previously reserved for dictators and facists - people and movements we would resist and defend ourselves and others against. After reading it I started to realize this foreign policy, as extreme and distaseful as it was, was merely an extension of a more covert policy that began after World War II. This report simply makes it all explicit. This is the extent to which many Americans have abdicated their responsibility as citizens in a democratic society, having passively deferred to the politcians.

I am going to be purchasing a book for Vahid (see previous posts) who has given me his mailing address offline. I shall order an extra copy for you presuming you can get your copy from him.

I'll post more later. I have to go right now.

[johnrenesch]

I meant to ask you both again, did you watch any of the Pangea Day festivities on Saturday. If not you can watch the videos which are all archived at www.PangeaDay.org .

I watched the entire four hours. I wanted to be engaged in something in which millions of people from all around the world were also participating....simultaneously!

The speakers, the music and the films were inspiring and touched me deeply. I cried a few times. The organizers somehow tapped into the "universality" of human beings rather than their differences.

[John Renesch]

Dear Vahid and Aziz,

I just learned from the publisher of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man that an embargo prevents us from sending you the books for the U.S. I will have to contact their international distributor and hopefully they can send them.

Apparently, "Neither Fed-Ex, UPS or USPS can deliver to this country" acoording to the publisher. This seems so nonsensical to me! More of the insane behavior and attitudes of governments.

So the books will not be arriving quite as soon as we would have wished.

I am posting this information here in the blog so others who are not posting but still reading can know this.

Best to you both,

John

[Vahid]

I believe that such kind of embargo clearly indicates that a Cold War between the two countries has been started. The former Cold War which entailed a lot of costs in terms of American tax money and human lives on both sides suddenly came to an end with absolutely no reason, and alas, similarly this new Cold War has already started with absolutely no reason! I just can hope that at least this time we could witness a finale that save money and human lives, probably equally on both sides, a hell of a lot more.

[John Renesch]

Vahid, interesting how our perspectives differ based upon our sources of information. Perhaps we could also discuss this when we speak by Skype next week.

Are both your references to Cold Wars between our two countries or are you referring to the USSR/US Cold War that ended around 1991?

[Vahid]

Sorry for the unclear comment, by the former Cold War I meant the USSR/US and by the new Cold War I meant the clash between US/Islamic World.

[John Renesch]

Vahid, in the case of the USSR/US Cold War, it did not end for "absolutely no reason." It ended because the USSR came unglued...imploded on itself. Some Americans still take credit for "winning the Cold war" but there was no victory per se as the other side simply dissolved back into independent states following Gorbachev's announcement of perestroika and glasnost. Here's a summary from Wikipedia:

In December 1989, Gorbachev and George H.W. Bush declared the Cold War officially over at a summit meeting in Malta. But by then, the Soviet alliance system was on the brink of collapse, and the Communist leaders of the Warsaw Pact states were losing power. In the USSR itself, Gorbachev tried to reform the party to destroy resistance to his reforms, but, in doing so, ultimately weakened the bonds that held the state and union together. By February 1990, the Communist Party was forced to surrender its 73-year old monopoly on state power. By December of the next year, the union-state also dissolved, breaking the USSR up into fifteen separate independent states.

Is this new information for you, Vahid? I am interested in how Iranians remember how it happened. This could be another example of how each of us sees different news or media and is subject to different "spins" of the facts.

[Vahid]

For the most part, people can expect an event to occur based on a couple of reasonable chain of changes both on micro and macro scales. When you see an unexpected event you may concur that the event has occurred with absolutely no reason. One might say that many analysts did expect that something really terrible and big could have contributed to the dissolving of the former USSR not just the reformist agenda of Gorbachev.

About the Iranian perspective I might add that after the breaking up of this super power state to lesser power states, certain official figures here in Iran did go too far to take the credit of this collapse for themselves and the rise of political Islam!

Interestingly, some of them are now predicting that we will soon witness the day that the US will break up too into 50 lesser power states. For me, this prediction is pretty unexpected and hence with absolutely no reason. However, the expected or unexpected tagging usually hinges on your mental model. Needless to say that we cannot establish a unique and universal mental model that, once used, could lead to true or false statements about the futures.

[John Renesch]

Vahid, here's an example of language differences (or perhaps how we each translate)....when you say "absolutely no reason" I hear mystery or unexplained phenomenon. That's why I offered some explanation for the end of the Cold War.

A surprise or unanticipated event is different from my POV (point of view). The fall of the Berlin Wall without any opposition was very symbolic to many of us as the "beginning of the end" of European communism and the unravelling of the Soviet Union. I have written about this as the collective loss of legitimacy for the Wall, the domination of the USSR and the cultural divide. East German soldiers failed to fire their weapons whereas perhaps the day before they may have shot the people who stormed the Wall to tear it down. But legitimacy for the Wall dissipated among the governemnts, the military and the people.....so it came down.

Could the U.S. unravel in a similar way? I doubt it since we started as a collection of states unlike the Soviets who defeated and occupied their "states." Not that America hasn't been marching somewhat imperialistically in recent years but the original 48 states are willingly part of the republic.

Will the American Empire collapse? It very well could given that all empires collapse eventually and almost all through their own hubris, causing themselvs to implode (to come apart from within).

[Vahid]

John, let's return to the issue of war between the US and Iran, of course, from a pretty novel perspective. I presume that you are well familiar with the history of American Involvement in Wars. If not, you can simply read through this table:

http://americanhistory.about.com/library/timelines/bltimelineuswars.htm

As you can see, counting the Afghanistan invasion in 2001, there have been 11 wars invloving the US starting from 1900s until now, 2000s, that makes 11 decades. Suppose that the number of the US wars per each decade is a random variable. Therefore, this particular event has an average rate of one per decade. Provided that these events occur independently of the time since the last event, you may use the Poisson distribution in probability theory to calculate the odds that there will be exactly 3 wars involving the US in 2000s. The Lambda in the formula, average rate of event of war per decade, is equal to one and by using the Poisson distribution you can estimate a probability of almost 6% for the third US war in the 2000s decade.

Does this make sense to you?

[John Renesch]

Vahid, this may be of interest to a probability theorist but not to me. Also, these data mix apples and oranges....we came to the aid of the allies in both World Wars and were a part of an alliance (NATO and the UN) in two other conflicts. From my POV we started going off the tracks with Vietnam where we thought we could do what the French could not and failed miserably.

Without referencing the past, there is no reason for there to be future wars. If it was bound to happen I could go into other work. But I am not a fatalist nor a cynic. I will continue doing what I can to advocate a better future for the world - a world that doesn't need to revert to military conflict when differences arise, much like what South Africa did in 1994.