inham az Reza Aslan

[deerouz]

Wow, it seems Faraj Sarkouhi also showed his true face!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/persian/arts/2011/01/110116_fs_iran_culture_policy.shtml

In seriousness, what Aslan says in his piece is along the same lines as what Sarkouhi is suggesting (and I hope you're not suggesting Sarkouhi is on IR's payroll or their apologist) but his piece has poor choice of words and less substance and analysis. I also agree that this so-called "reformer" picture of AN has to be discussed within the context of political dictatorship that he has contributed to, something that Aslan miserably fails to do here but has done in the past.

Sarkouhi is not saying the same thing as Aslan. Sarkouhi is specifically saying that the new generation of IRI leaders may be even trying to relax social pressure in order to maintain their political and economic dictatorship (read the last paragraph). He has no illusion about Ahmadinejad leading some sort of political reforms that would lead toward liberalism or anything.

Aslan is proposing an entirely different picture, pretending as if Ahmadinejad may be genuinely interested in a liberal or nationalistic interpretation of Islamic governance in Iran, and not just as a short term tactic to get regime out of the current crisis. Entirely different hypothesis.

I even disagree with Sarkouhi's analysis. As Ardeshir correctly pointed out earlier on this thread, once you eliminate everyone to your left, you easily become the most leftist politician around! Everything that is being highlighted as "liberal policies of Ahmadinejad" was done hundred times more during Khatami and even Rafsanjani. Just the fact that Ahmadinejad allows a simple specific stage show that we didn't expect him to, doesn't make him a liberal in any sense.

 

[meyti]

"raisin aslan" aslan kodoom kharieh?

 

[Natural]

this reminded me of something i read a while ago:


اگر به سراسر اين تاريخ نگاه كنيد، يا اغماضهاي جزئي، سراسر آن يك طيف يكنواخت و تكراري و سينوسي است. قبيله اي دچار ظلم و ستم، ركود و پس از آن رخوت، بي تفاوتي و نوميدي ميشود، يك قوم، يك سركرده، يك جريان، يك همسايه فرصت را مغتنم ميشمارد در دستش شمشير و در كامش زبان چرب و وعده هاي فريبنده ولي در كلّه اش جز به غارت و تاراج ره هيچ چيز ديگري نمي انديشد. يعني براي فتح فقط زور بازو نياز است و ويراني و آتش زدن، چه در اين مرحله استطاعت انديشيدن نه تنها عامل موٌثري نيست بلكه تا حدودي باز دارنده هم هست.

فاتح ميشود، قبلي ها را يا ميكُشد و يا فراري ميدهد، جايش مي نشيند تا از درون قبيله يك عده كه نه شهامت كشته شدن را داشتند و نه قدرت و يا شانس فرار، به سرعت تغيير شكل مي دهند، با فاتح به صورت كاسه داغ تر از آش همداستاني ميكنند، ميشوند دست راستش!

 

[a123321r]

That's the key, abz jan. The guy is a pro, and in the field of social science you can pretty much prove anything by selecting your facts. It reminds me of the writing style of a certain former ISP member

LOL.. wouldn't it be funny if one day we find out simply ken IS reza aslan!? but seriously though I'm really curious about the motivation behind his change of stance.. is it motivated by incentives from iri... or even the west (we all know they love AN really! lol) or has he genuinely managed to come to the conclusions he mentioned in his article! what do you think?

 

[deerouz]

LOL.. wouldn't it be funny if one day we find out simply ken IS reza aslan!? but seriously though I'm really curious about the motivation behind his change of stance.. is it motivated by incentives from iri... or even the west (we all know they love AN really! lol) or has he genuinely managed to come to the conclusions he mentioned in his article! what do you think?

Well I can only guess. Personally, I don't think Reza Aslan's positions has ever been genuine. The guy was a regular PhD student with no media or scholarly experience, when 9/11 happened. All of a sudden the media were looking everywhere for "Islam experts", especially from muslim community, and somehow he found useful contacts to sell himself to media as an Islamic expert. Then when the Americans were looking for "moderate muslims" and "good guys on our side", he became a voice of Islamic reformism, with no apparent theological background or credential.

Interesting that his resume does not mention anything about his educational background, while he was always presented to media as a scholar. I just checked on UMI dissertation database; his PhD thesis to University of California at Santa Barbara is dated 2009! So he has been a PhD student for over a decade?! The title is "Global Jihadism as a transnational social movement: A theoretical framework". Seems a very convenient title for these times.

At the same time, he has been presenting himself to the american muslim community as a sort of defenders of muslims, a nice face that can represent them, a sort of spokesperson. and to Hollywood as some sort of an Islamic authority to provide consultation on movie scripts with Muslim and terrorism themes (see his wiki page), and to many American organizations and government agencies as the face of moderate Islam they have been looking for. In a way, he is selling an adjustable image to each audience! The guy is a good businessman, if nothing.

(Not to mention that his wiki page says he is a nephew of Leila Forouhar! Mashallah az har angoshtesh yeh honari mirizeh!)

Why writing an article in support of Ahmadinejad? I don't know, perhaps with this article he is trying to appease his non-Iranian american muslim audience (who generally admire AN), while also satisfy an anti-war or passive section of American population who welcome any effort to avert a possible war (even at the cost of sanitizing a bloody dictator). It is all about audience after all. For a while he was trying to capture an Iranian audience because perhaps he was thinking the IRI was going down fast and he wanted a share of the loot. Then now that he finds IRI is seemingly firmly in place, he is switching to a different audience. And of course a nice grant from certain organizations is always a possibility!

This is all speculation of course, but this is what I think is possible.

 

[IranZamin]

Reading this dipshit's biography, what I found interesting is that he has never lived in Iran under IR! He left in 79 when he was barely 7 years old.

This is not a trivial issue. With this background, his practical knowledge of IR and understanding of Iranian society is no more profound than that of an average American "scholar" with a passing interest in the country. They just take him more seriously because he has an Iranian name.

His stance on AN is probably shaped just as much by naivete as anything else.

 

[shahinc]

No one remotely associated with NIAC is trustworthy. All of these guys take their Q from Amirahamdi

When it comes to NIAC, I have been always puzzled by Trita Parsi's PHD thesis and his book on the relationship of Iran and Israel.

He has apparently interviewed Iranian and Isreaeli officials for his book. I am curious to know where did these interviews took places,

How did he manage to get these interviews given that his father was supposedly a political prisoner under IR and he is not Muslim himself and has grown up outside Iran !!!

Where did he find the connection to pull off something this big !!

 

[raminio05]

Reading this dipshit's biography, what I found interesting is that he has never lived in Iran under IR! He left in 79 when he was barely 7 years old.

This is not a trivial issue. With this background, his practical knowledge of IR and understanding of Iranian society is no more profound than that of an average American "scholar" with a passing interest in the country. They just take him more seriously because he has an Iranian name.

His stance on AN is probably shaped just as much by naivete as anything else.

It could be this IZ jaan, or it could be that he's a professional pretender. Now thinking back in hindsight, this guy would easy get a job at cirque the soleil the way he's been professionally walking the line for years.

 

[Farsi Zaban]

Reading this dipshit's biography, what I found interesting is that he has never lived in Iran under IR! He left in 79 when he was barely 7 years old.

This is not a trivial issue. With this background, his practical knowledge of IR and understanding of Iranian society is no more profound than that of an average American "scholar" with a passing interest in the country. They just take him more seriously because he has an Iranian name.

His stance on AN is probably shaped just as much by naivete as anything else.

Iran wasn't his thing until the elections. At first, I was actually excited to see him finally talk about Iran in the media. However, I quickly gathered that writing and talking about Iran was just another way for him to get on TV. His post election reporting at the daily beast really exposed him as someone with a cursory understanding of Iran. He reacted to pieces of information too quickly not grasping the complexity of the situation. It's safe to say that his audience is not us. He is writing for an exclusively progressive American and foreign immigrant audience.

 

[IranZamin]

I don't doubt for a second that he's a run-of-the-mill opportunist. What I'm saying is that he's also ill-informed, with a clearly superficial understanding of the country he left as a child. I'm honestly not sure if he can read and write in Farsi. Even if he wanted to offer anything meaningful, he lacks the necessary background and concrete connection to do so.

I think the rest of us, especially those who frequent the progressive sites he writes for, should make sure that his target audience understands that regardless of motives, this man is not qualified to provide serious insight on AN and Iranian politics in general. This is especially important, given that a sizable portion of the progressive base is so determined to oppose any and all wars, and even more steadfast in opposing all conservative positions on foreign policy, that they may give this clown's self-serving fluff pieces much more weight than they deserve.

 

[Zob Ahan]

He was on PBS last night talking about Islam in America with this Arab American mohajabe woman. He should stick to that topic and leave Iranian politics to people who know it. Like IZ said I doubt if he could read & write Farsi.

 

[Flint]

I have a rule of thumb that works most of the time. Just watch their appearances on the media circuit. One look at his list and I know all I need to know about him.

He has also appeared on TV and Radio, including National Public Radio (NPR), The Rachel Maddow Show, Meet the Press, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, The Colbert Report, Anderson Cooper 360°, Hardball, Nightline, Real Time with Bill Maher, and Fareed Zakaria GPS.

 

[Zob Ahan]

I have a rule of thumb that works most of the time. Just watch their appearances on the media circuit. One look at his list and I know all I need to know about him.

He has also appeared on TV and Radio, including National Public Radio (NPR), The Rachel Maddow Show, Meet the Press, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, The Colbert Report, Anderson Cooper 360°, Hardball, Nightline, Real Time with Bill Maher, and Fareed Zakaria GPS.

LOL @ your rule if they don't show up on Fox they are a sellout.

 

[Natural]

how dare he not go on Hannity and O'Reilly.

 

[raminio05]

hahaha Flint

 

[Flint]

LOL @ your rule if they don't show up on Fox they are a sellout.

It worked for him, didn't it? Az shookhi gozashteh, people who appear on network press want to come across as reasoned, moderate, thoughtful and mature. Invariably, this sort of demeanor somehow leads to cozying up to IR because they can't afford to appear bellicose and hawkish at the risk of being labeled a neocon. So what they are left with are, you guessed it, negotiations, seminars, conferences and we all know what "negotiations without preconditions" got us. I won't be surprised one bit if we find out that he is on the take too.

 

[shahinc]

I have a rule of thumb that works most of the time. Just watch their appearances on the media circuit. One look at his list and I know all I need to know about him.

He has also appeared on TV and Radio, including National Public Radio (NPR), The Rachel Maddow Show, Meet the Press, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, The Colbert Report, Anderson Cooper 360°, Hardball, Nightline, Real Time with Bill Maher, and Fareed Zakaria GPS.

LOOOLL, While I do not fully agree with your Black and white distinction based on appearance on TV shows, I still prefer it over the other people here who judge them as follow:

If you are clean shaven and wearing a tie and defending Islam and makign excuses for Islamic terrorists, then you are a open minded liberal and must be right
This is how some of the fan boys of Reza Aslan fell for him till he came out with this .

 

[Natural]

LOOOLL, While I do not fully agree with your Black and white distinction based on appearance on TV shows, I still prefer it over the other people here who judge them as follow:

If you are clean shaven and wearing a tie and defending Islam and makign excuses for Islamic terrorists, then you are a open minded liberal and must be right
This is how some of the fan boys of Reza Aslan fell for him till he came out with this .

Great analysis. Spot on. Lol

 

[footballeirani]

Reza Aslan is the westernized version of Iranian akhoonds. The guy literally got 10,000 dollars plus tickets and hotel to come and give a one hour talk at my school about Islam!

:redface:


Sweet deal if you ask me.

 

[Farzad-USA]

Reading Ahmadinejad via Wikileaks: A Freedom Lover or a Two-Bit Dictator?

In a recent article for the Atlantic, Middle East expert Reza Aslan writes that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may not be the hard-line president outside observers actually thinks he is. Based on unverified WikiLeaks documents and remarks by the president himself, the author concludes that Ahmadinejad is, in fact, in favor of greater social and political freedoms and the "Persianization" of Iranian society, but is isolated among others in Iran's current ruling establishment:

[Ahmadinejad]... is actually a reformer whose attempts to liberalize, secularize, and even "Persianize" Iran have been repeatedly stymied by the country's more conservative factions... But if you oppose the Mullahs' rule, yearn for greater social and political freedoms for the Iranian people, and envision an Iran that draws inspiration from the glories of its Persian past, then, believe it or not, you have more in common with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than you might have thought."

Here is why Aslan's characterization of Ahmadinejad is flawed:
Ahmadinejad is the kind of man who should not be judged by his words, but by his actions. As somebody who has met him on several occasions, once when he was Tehran's mayor and twice when I was reporting on his trips to the UN in New York over the past few years, I can say I've never seen a more insincere, manipulative and deceptive personality in my entire life.

One doesn't need WikiLeaks to know what Ahmadinejad has said about freedom. He has claimed openly that Iran is a free country where people have the right to express their opinions. He has also said that there are no gays in Iran. But his actions and Iran's grim reality tell a different story.

Right after the 2009 election, dozens of prominent politicians, journalists, human rights lawyers and students were arrested, tortured, and put on trial. Some have said publicly that their arrest orders were signed several days prior to the election, illustrating the pre-planned nature of the arrests.

The post-election crackdown resulted in the killing of dozens of protesters and the arrests of more than 5,000 Iranian citizens. During the same period of time discussed by Aslan, Ahmadinejad's intelligence forces managed the most notorious levels of mistreatment and abuse of political prisoners inside prisons.

Over the past months, a number of political prisoners have been executed based on fabricated files provided by Ahmadinejad's Ministry of Intelligence.

Aslan's reference to a WikiLeaks document that claims Ahmadinejad asked for more freedom for the Iranian people at a cabinet meeting in the midst of the post-election uprising, and that in response "the Revolutionary Guard's Chief of Staff, Mohammed Ali Jafari, slapped Ahmadinejad across the face right in the middle of the meeting... " is entirely a myth. No credible source has ever confirmed such an incident.

To speak about freedom for Iranians at a time when, under his command, the Iranian police, escorted the Basij paramilitary forces to brutally attack a dormitory at Tehran University, destroying the building, and injuring dozens of students, is duplicative. The video of the attack, leaked by someone from within the intelligence community a few months later, leaves no doubt about the direct role of the police and Ahmadinejad's allies in the brutal treatment of Iranian students. Several of those students would be dead the next day.

In fact, if it were not for the support of the Revolutionary Guards, Iran's intelligence, and the paramilitary Basiji forces, it would have been impossible for Ahmadinejad to secure his second term in office, particularly after a massive uprising by the Iranian people.

To be clear, Ahmdinejad appoints the Ministers of Interior, Intelligence, Culture and Telecommunications, and Ahmadinejad's Minister of Interior assigns the police chief. Even 18 months after the election, arrests of political activists continue, mistreatment inside prisons continues, and the government's opposition cannot hold any gatherings anywhere.

Ahmadinejad has full control over the Ministry of Culture and Ministry of Telecommunications. The Ministry of Culture has actively restricted independent media and has raised the level of censorship to the point that criticizing the president's policies by journalists is either impossible or has severe consequences for them. The Ministry of Telecommunications has also established the most advanced filtering systems in the world, coupled with allowing the Ministry of Intelligence to track and trap activists and students who are criticizing the government online.

Ahmadinejad's readiness to make concessions on Iran's nuclear program, according to Reza Aslan's reading of WikiLeaks, is another myth that does not fit the reality on the ground. Like his remarks on freedom and human rights in Iran, his public remarks on Iran's nuclear program, are aimed to mislead the international community. The reality is that Ahmadinejad has made the nuclear issue in Iran a matter of national pride. And no one can seriously criticize the government's position on this matter. He has mocked U.N. resolutions against Iran and has been publicly defiant regarding Iran's nuclear program. It's not surprising because the Iranian leadership has yet to come to a conclusion that concession with the West is necessary or serve the regime's interests.

As a matter of principle, Iran's supreme leader, and those who have managed Iran's nuclear dossier, believe once they get to an irreversible point, meaning to the point where they acquire full fuel cycle, Western countries will be forced to accept a nuclear Iran, even if ultimately Iranians accept severe inspections. In fact, there has been no serious conversation on giving up uranium enrichment in Iran, or any kind of agreement that the West might appreciate. So Ahmadinejad's lip service doesn't really mean anything in Iran's strategic nuclear policy, as we see that the negotiations go nowhere over and over again.

Furthermore, in dealing with Iran's nuclear program, Ahmadinejad is just a messenger, and a manipulative one. Neither Amadinejad nor Iran's Parliament have control over Iran's nuclear program -- it is Iran's supreme leader and a number of his advisers who draw the lines for the president and Iran's negotiating team on the nuclear issue. So arguing that Ahmadinejad is a man of concession and the others, hard-liners, are in favor of confrontation and defiance is a misreading of Iranian politics.

WikiLeaks documents are memos written by U.S. diplomats based on their daily observations, their conversations with sources, media publications and even rumors they hear. It also reflects what American diplomats might have sensed, guessed or understood from a particular incident, trend and individual in a country. It's hard to estimate how much of such information is factual and, more importantly, in which context these memos have been written and discussed.

We should not forget that the United States doesn't have an embassy in Tehran and American diplomats have very little access to the major players in Iran. This makes an accurate reading of the events much more difficult.

Ahmadinejad's remarks compared to his actual actions on Iran's nuclear program and human rights indicate that he is not a man of his word. Many Iranians know him to be a pathological liar who says anything at anytime to manipulate his audience. What Aslan has pointed out is that Ahmadinejad's dictatorial ambitions may in fact go beyond the Islamic establishment, and there should be no mistake about his ruthlessness and his ability to use violence to secure power at any cost.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/omid-memarian/reading-ahmadinejad-via-w_b_815917.html?view=print

Follow Omid Memarian on Twitter: www.twitter.com/omid_m