I had been informed over a year ago, that I am of similar disposition with
His excellency Mahmood Ahmadinijad, President of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Since then I have sought to listen to him at every opportunity. I was not
able to discern his dispensation because he gives two types of speeches. Those
given in Iran for local consumption and those given when he is accorded an
international stage. I was however able to distinguish one or two common themes
of Hon. Ahmadinijad.
I will afford myself this opportune privilege to share thoughts on current
global conditions and perceptions.
I will come back to Life and purpose in democracy later. Please forgive the
temporal, if diversion therefrom.
It seems Ahmadinijad and I hold similar views on Democracy and the
underpinnings of a viable democracy. I hasten to add though that he does attach
qualifiers to democracy as he understands it, qualifiers which are unique to Iran's
culture and people. I am not as familiar with those uniquenesses as the Hon
Ahmadinijad is and therefore I may not offer opinion on them. One idea I
would liket to share with him is that my understanding of democratic governance
is that Presidents are elected by universal suffrage to preside over the
affairs of state and its administration. It is burdensome to interpret election as
President to mean assignment as Spokesperson for the people of Iran. The
Presidency must not assume agency as spokesperson for the citizens. They are two
distinct roles. Further, it is highly improbable that a position of
Spokesperson for all citizens of any nation would be valuable or productive.
Democracy has recognized this difficulty and that is where it is separated from
religion. The prophets had an immense task of explaining that they speak for
God/Allah and they have arguably achieved various levels of acceptance or success.
That is why they declare faith (sans innovation and query) as the bedrock of
the religions. It is much harder to convince millions of unique citizens
that having elected me to oversee the affairs of the nation implies agency for
speech for them. Democracy however is simultaneously premised on various
cultures and disparate interests if you will, but that those cultures and
interests be permitted to speak for themselves without fear of oppression or
subjugation. This is the value of elections and indeed all tenets of democracy in
national administrations. Without this, democracy is dis-eased. Therefore, amid
arrests, torture, murder, decimation of intrinsic human rights, it is
difficult to assert with moderate precision that you speak for the nation even at
international fora. I do agree with Hon. Ahmadinijad though that coercing
agency for speech for another is equally deplorable. There lies the dilemma. I do
not know if Mahmood, Hon., understands democracy to be an equalizer of
pseudo-democracy, or if he believes democracy is a system or mode of governance of
a collection of unique individuals who form a nation. I believe in the latter.
Another area where I'm afraid there may be a divergence of perception would
be the quest for knowledge and discovery. I'm aware, especially in a speech he
gave at Columbia university that Scientific discovery and inquiry ought not
be stifled or managed. I hold this same view. I do have trouble marrying that
view with his management of inquiry and scientific research in Iran. I had
expected that if he were only interested in Man's capacity and desire for
discovery and knowledge, he would accord citizens of Iran the freedom to pursue
any area of study and inquiry and he would encourage unfettered expression in
any and all disciplines of inquiry. He did plead with us to inquire more into
the cause of the holocaust which leads me to believe that he does accept the
historical fact of its occurrence. He urges us to review the circumstances
of the holocaust so that we may make ammends and prevent its repetition. I
understand him to share with us that Palestinians did not have anything to do
with the holocaust and I agree with him as I'm confident all those who are
familiar with that history do. I join him in pleading with Israel to review the
concerns of Palestinians as they forge ahead in re-establishing a national
identity. I guess I'm not sure why the need for more inquiry into the cause of
the holocaust would lead him to condemn the state of Israel and for all
intents and purposes, to deny Israel's right to exist. In deference to him though,
he has qualified that submission to mean the condemnation of Zionism or
expansion of Jewish nationality at the expense of Palestinian nationality. Perhaps
there will be a convergence of perspectives soon. One idea I wish to share
here with him is that the allowance of research and inquiry unfettered does
include the burdens he himself places on such in Iran. It is not enough to
recognize the fault of others. It is wise to review our own faults, and to the
extent that contributes to the fault of our fellow man, we must endeavour to
mitigate them.
I advise the US, Europe, Asia, Africa, South America, Australia, and Arabia
to support the citizens of their nations and consider deference to minority
citizens on contentious issues because they have the most to lose in any
ensuing conflict. I urge Sarcozy and France to tone down rhetoric of belligerence.
Liberation and Freedom movements are not only a necessity, they are valuable
in maintaining equilibrium in the geo-political system.
Haroun Rashid, Al Mutawakkil. MQDT. Darbo.
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
いいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいい
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
いいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいい
|