Brilliant piece by Roger Cohen in today's Times saying, Goddamnit, the Iranians are a lot like us, let's start talking to them. In a word: heretical. A few comments ahead of the excerpt, then more comment below. First, Cohen's view of the pragmatism and democracy of Iran bears out the wonderful piece Mohammad of Vancouver, who is from Iran, wrote on this site a month ago. Also: note the full embrace of Chas Freeman! Finally, note that Cohen is being a broken record on Iran. And this is vital; this is what a columnist should be when he is on to something, repeat himself till all hear him. Cohen [emphases mine]:
While Bernard Lewis, in a recent article in Foreign Affairs, posits
an epochal clash between “Islamic theocracy and liberal democracy”
whose outcome will be decisive, I don’t see any victor in this fight.
Rather, a variety of compromises between the two forces will emerge, as
in Iran.
relations with the most dynamic society in the region. What autocrats
from the Gulf to Cairo fear most is an Iranian-American breakthrough,
precisely because it would shake up every cozy, static regional
relationship, including Washington’s with Israel…
I think pragmatism lies at the core of the revolution’s survival. It
led to cooperation with Israel in cold-war days; it ended the Iraq war;
it averted an invasion of Afghanistan in 1998 after Iranian diplomats
were murdered; it brought post-9/11 cooperation with America on
Afghanistan; it explains the ebb and flow of liberalization since 1979;
and it makes sense of the Jewish presence.
Pragmatism is also one
way of looking at Iran’s nuclear program. A state facing a
nuclear-armed Israel and Pakistan, American invasions in neighboring
Iraq and Afghanistan, and noting North Korea’s immunity from assault,
might reasonably conclude that preserving the revolution requires
nuclear resolve.
What’s required is American pragmatism in
return, one that convinces the mullahs that their survival is served by
stopping short of a bomb.
Obama to jump over his own bonfire of indignation as the Mideast taboos
that just caused the scandalous disqualification of Charles Freeman for a senior intelligence post are shed in the name of a new season of engagement and reason.
OK. Why is Cohen heretical? Two reasons. One idealistic, one ambitious. I believe he was deeply moved by Gaza, which shamed him as a Jew, to look again at What Israel has become. He has recognized that Israel's militarism is a huge threat to its neighbors, and this is a theme; it has been since Egypt went nuts in the 60s cause Israel was acquiring nuclear weapons. So Cohen is now using his fine mind in the service of exploring these truths that our national security depends upon. That's the idealism. Ambitious reason. Cohen understands (as Glenn Greenwald and I do too) that These ideas are being mainstreamed. It's taking a while, but Realism with a Human-rights soul is coming in. He wants to be in the van, and write the bestseller that will change Jewish public opinion. It's a big job. Someone's gonna do it. Is Cohen too early? Has he spent his journalistic capital on a stock that won't surge for another five years? I don't think so.
