Fear-mongering at YaleFlash back to 2006. Professor Marcia Inhorn, a medical anthropologist and director of the Center for Middle Eastern and North African Studies at the University of Michigan, is invited to lecture in Teheran on her field of expertise, infertility and assisted reproductive technologies in Muslim countries. On her return, she seeks to dispel misconceptions about the Middle East. Because of the "American daily diet of fearsome media discourses about the Middle East, particularly Iran," she complains, "it was difficult to convince relatives, including my 80-year-old mother, that it was safe for me, a mother of two young children, to travel to that part of the world." Landing in Detroit, she finds the same bias: When the customs official at the Detroit International Airport asked me why I had been 'over there,' I told him it was for an academic conference. Then he asked, 'And they didn't behead you?,' to which I replied, 'No, they served me delicious food.' He retorted, 'But you never know what was in it (i.e., the food),' to which I responded, perhaps too flippantly, 'Probably uranium.' Fortunately, he returned my passport and let me proceed to baggage claim, where I retrieved my two gorgeous Persian carpets."Inhorn's conclusion: I would argue that such fear-mongering is very unwise. It is leading to closed minds, closed embassies, restricted visas, travel bans and demeaning airport luggage searches for those of us who overcome these travel restrictions."They're not going to cut off our heads or irradiate us - that's her message. They just want to serve us their delicious food and sell us their gorgeous carpets. Nothing to fear but fear itself. Kissed to death by America
People in and around the Obama administration are taking the position that his low key on Iran is carefully calculated. It's not that he doesn't sympathize with the protesters, he just doesn't want their cause to be identified with the United States. That would be a kiss of death. I'm not persuaded, and as I've suggested already, his real problem with Iran's turmoil is that it's just so inconvenient to a Palestine-first approach. Laura Rozen at her blog The Cable quoted an "Iran hand in touch with the administration" as saying that Obama "is dedicated to diplomacy in a manner that is almost ideological," that he's already decided what he wants to do in the Middle East "over the next eight years" (bit of presumption there), and that he doesn't want to be "distracted" from the "larger strategic objective" or "let himself get shaken by stuff like this" - "stuff" referring to the reality in the streets of Iran and the Middle East more generally. If this spectacular hubris isn't a formula for failure in the Middle East, what is? Is America washed up in the Middle East?
Memo from Gulfistan
Martin Kramer made these remarks at the 8th Herzliya Conference on January 21.Lately it has been said that the Arabs are in a panic over the growing power of Iran. We are told that Arab rulers so fear the rise of Iran that this fear has eclipsed all others--it's the sum of all fears. And it's making a new Middle East That is what David Brooks, New York Times columnist, wrote last November: "Iran has done what decades of peace proposals have not done--brought Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, the Palestinians and the US together. You can go to Jerusalem or to some Arab capitals and the diagnosis of the situation is the same: Iran is gaining hegemonic strength over the region." Martin Indyk of the Saban Center used the same language in a November interview. Iran, he said, was making "a bid for hegemony in the region." |
Top Rated Posts
Tags:Blogroll |