Let me tell you that once Obama becomes President, if he plays it right, he can own the "street" in Iran. He has similar popularity to what JFK had almost 50 years ago. If he ran for President in Iran he would be elected!! That’s much more powerful, in my opinion, than his willingness to talk to the leadership in Iran. -Iranian born and raised friend now living in and a citizen of the U.S.

Does a young man – maybe 23 years old – growing up on the streets of Tehran really hate America? Does he want his government to confront the United States head on? Develop a nuclear weapon? Engage in military confrontations? Worse yet, does this 23 year old aspire to become a terrorist, wanting to destroy the United States – our bases and our personnel – whenever and wherever he can? Just about every republican candidate running for president this past year wanted us to accept this narrative: Rudy Giuliani’s campaign advertisement “The next crisis is a moment away!” illustrates some of the most blatant fear-mongering … and in one republican debate five out of the nine candidates endorsed a preemptive nuclear strike (two others gave no objections) if it would stop Iran from gaining a nuclear weapon. Now, Seymour Hersh reports in the most recent issue of The New Yorker that the Bush Administration has already developed attack plans, even involving tactical nukes, and that regime change is the eminent desire of his inner circle. In conversation with Radio Farda, which broadcasts into Iran, Bush recently explained, “They’ve declared they want to have a nuclear weapon to destroy people — some in the Middle East. And that’s unacceptable to the United States, and it’s unacceptable to the world.” – Now, maybe a U.S. President can generate additional leverage, or stir up unrest, by talking directly to the citizens of an enemy country, but the strategy encapsulated in Bush’s rhetoric seems more apt at alienating unaligned Iranians than at shifting their allegiance to us. As a 23 year old myself, I wonder if an Iranian my age might have more short-term, personally relevant goals and opinions that wouldn’t relate with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s vision for their country and wouldn’t relate with Bush’s rhetoric either? And just maybe, a drastic shift in American diplomacy can coincide with a drastic change in American leadership to engender a more friendly and humane Iran.My friend here in America, maybe twice my age, who was born and raised in Iran and returns to see family and friends with great frequency, lays it out in his assessment of the situation and advice for an Obama presidency after a recent visit back home. The italics from the start of this post continue here and need I say more…

Obama has a lot going for him: He is young; he is NOT a WASP (with apologies to you); his middle name is Hussain (which to the typical Shia follower is very significant); and he doesn’t look like a fanatic (which Bush does to them – they don’t see Bush as a friend – no matter how much they hate the mullas and how much Bush talks about "democracy"). Obama can undermine the very oppressive regime by going to the people – he should ignore the leadership! Any early approach to them would be like oxygen feeding them.

There are many channels of directly going to the people in Iran – there are dozens of cable channels and radio stations being beamed to Iran. Then there is the Internet and his talks will be placed on CD and distributed.

I am very excited about what is achievable for World Peace by Obama. He can do it because he is the first person in this position who can truly connect with the majority of people in the world because of his background and philosophy.

Thank you my friend. Thank you for adding the geo-cultural context that I was unable to provide and that our country so desperately needs to hear. Even if some of the Iranian people will not be as sympathetic to Obama’s message of global cooperation, equality and freedom, he’s the first American politician in a position unique enough to try.

Comments Off   Spotlight