*** 21-Sep-13 World View -- Does Iran's 'Heroic Flexibility' signal a real policy change?
This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
- Iran's policies move in the direction of 'Heroic Flexibility'
- Iran's changing strategy defined by younger generations
- The op-ed by Iran's president Hassan Rouhani
****
**** Iran's policies move in the direction of 'Heroic Flexibility'
****
Iran's president Hassan Rouhani, will visit the United Nations next week
Iran's extremely hardline Supreme Leader, the Ayatollah Seyed Ali
Khamenei, surprised Iranian officials this week by using the phrase
"Heroic Flexibility" to describe how Iran should negotiate nuclear
issues with America and the West.
According to Khamenei:
<QUOTE>"Though the world has changed, that cannot be a
justification for the change of ideals, goals, or the correct
path. ... The nuclear matter must be evaluated within this
outlook.
We do not accept nuclear weapons, neither due to nor not due to
America, but because of our beliefs. When we say that no one must
have nuclear weapons, we certainly do not pursue them, but the
true goal of Iran's opposition in this field is another matter.
Of course, these few countries do not want their monopoly to be
broken in the nuclear energy field... Therefore, the turmoil and
tension created by America, the West and their related currents in
the nuclear discussion must be understood and analyzed within the
framework of the deep tension between the Dominant System and the
Islamic Revolution.
I do not oppose correct diplomatic movements. I believe in what
was called 'heroic flexibility' years ago because this movement is
very good and necessary in situations but it must be binding to
fundamental conditions.
A good wrestler sometimes shows flexibility due to technical
reasons but does not forget his opponent or his main goal.
All of these achievements were accomplished in the oven of the
enemies' pressure and conspiracies, and this valuable experience
demonstrates that no obstacle can stop a faithful, coherent and
determined people that know their way."<END QUOTE>
The phrase "Heroic Flexibility" refers to the act of a Muslim hero,
following the death of the prophet Mohamed in the 7th century, to
finally reverse his clan's opposition to the message of Mohamed. His
reversal is referred to as "History's Most Glorious Heroic
Flexibility." It led to major victories of Islam in Arabia, but it
also led to the major split in Islam between the Sunni and Shia
branches, and a bitter civil war that has been repeated throughout the
centuries.
So the deep historic significance of this phrase by the
hardline Khamenei was startling to other Iranian leaders, because
it was felt that Khamenei would not have used that particular
phrase unless he actually intended a major change of policy,
rather than simply some West-baiting statement.
Another Iranian leader, Ayatollah Sadegh Amoli Larijani, reacted to
the "heroic flexibility" phrase as follows:
<QUOTE>"Just as the Supreme Leader pointed out during the
[IRGC] commanders meeting, our country's officials and policy
makers must pay attention to America's true personality, behavior
and nature.
Negotiations must take place in the framework of a complete and
total understanding of the opposing side, and we must not forget
America's tricks and deception. We must not forget how they
supported this current in the [2009] sedition matter [Green
Movement] and were determined to confront the great Iranian nation
in their velvet reserves [referring to Velvet Revolution] with
their cast iron and steel claws."<END QUOTE>
American Enterprise Institute (Sept 17) and American Enterprise Institute (Sept 18)
****
**** Iran's changing strategy defined by younger generations
****
Assuming that a change in Iran's policies is actually about to
occur, many analysts are attributing it to the American sanctions.
This comes from the standard silly view that almost everything
in the world occurs because of something that happens in
Washington, when in fact very little that happens in the world
is caused by Washington policies.
If a policy change occurs, it would be part of a much larger change in
Iran's government that Generational Dynamics has been predicting for
years. (See for example, "China 'betrays' Iran, as internal problems in both countries mount"
from 2008.)
Iran is in a generational Awakening era. That's because its last
generational Crisis war began in 1979, with the Great Islamic
Revolution, and continued until 1988 with the Iran/Iraq war, during
which Iran was the target of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) --
poison gas from Saddam Hussein's Iraq army. The survivors of that
war, currently led by Khamenei, have devoted their lives to make sure
no such horrific war happens again. From the point of view of the
survivors, the way to do this is, first, to keep the country united
behind a hardline Islamic state and, second, to have a strategic
defense to the WMDs held by Iran's neighbors, including Pakistan and
Israel.
What characterizes a generational Awakening era is that, very simply,
the crisis war survivors die off, and they are replaced by younger
generations of people who grew up after the crisis war, who have no
personal memories of the horrors of the crisis war, and who rebel
against the survivors, creating a "generation gap." This happened in
America in the 1960s, when the presidencies of war survivors John
F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Richard M. Nixon were all faced
with massive student protests, demanding such things as sexual
freedoms, the end of the Vietnam War, and racial equality. The
student protests triggered police violence that reached a peak in the
1968 Democratic party convention in Chicago, though the protests
continued pretty freely after that.
In Iran, student protests began in the early 2000s, and police
violence reached a peak during the 2009 re-election of president
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The police violence was so bloody and brutal
that open protests have all but ended since then. But the underlying
generational changes cannot be stopped by police action. The
Iran/Iraq crisis war survivors are retiring and dying off, and the
younger generations of people with no personal memory of the crisis
war are reaching positions of power and influence. That's going to
happen no matter what the police do.
So in order to predict changes in Iran's policies, one needs
to look at the opinion of young people, as I've been doing
for years, and these are the conclusions that I've reached:
- Young people do not like the oppressive hardline Islamic
policies that restrict such things as sexual and political
freedoms.
- Young people do not have anything against Israel. They did not
like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's constant inflammatory statements about
Israel and the Holocaust, and they do not have any particular desire
to see Israel pushed into the sea.
- Young people like America and the West, while opposing some
specific Western policies, particularly Western sanctions, though some
of them blame Iran's inflammatory policies for the sanctions.
- In particular, young people dislike Western restrictions on Iran's
development of nuclear power, including nuclear weapons, because they
believe, especially after Iraq's use of poison gas on Iran, that such
weapons are necessary for Iran's defense.
I would add that it's been my opinion for years, in contradiction
to almost every American opinion on the left and the right,
that even if Iran has nuclear weapons, it has absolutely no
intention of using them on Israel.
Furthermore, Iran's leaders know that Israel is not their enemy, and
never has been. Their enemies are the Sunni nations, including the
Saudis and the Pakistanis.
So as I've been saying for years, I expect Iran's policies to move in
the directions dictated by the opinions of young people, as outlined
above. Thus, I would expect the hardline social behaviors to be
weakened, I would expect the inflammatory anti-Israel rhetoric to be
softened, but I would expect nuclear weapons development to continue.
In his 'Heroic Flexibility' speech, Supreme Leader Khamenei said that
Iran does not want nuclear weapons. I expect Iran to continue
development of nuclear weapons, but despite the concerns of Israel's
prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, it's my opinion that Iran has no
intention of using them on Israel.
****
**** The op-ed by Iran's president Hassan Rouhani
****
Iran's president Hassan Rouhani is traveling to the United
States this week to speak at the United Nations, and possibly
to meet with president Barack Obama.
During the last couple of weeks, we've reported on an op-ed by Russia's president Vladimir Putin
in the NY Times, and an op-ed by Senator John McCain
in Pravda.ru.
So it's only right that on Friday, the Washington Post published an
op-ed by Iran's president Hassan Rouhani. Rouhani has only recently
been elected president as a "reformer," which in Iran could mean
somebody only slightly less hardline than his predecessors. But my
guess is that "reformer" means that he's moving policy away from the
hardline policies of the war survivors toward the increasingly popular
policies of the young postwar generations.
<QUOTE>"Three months ago, my platform of “prudence and hope”
gained a broad, popular mandate. Iranians embraced my approach to
domestic and international affairs because they saw it as long
overdue. I’m committed to fulfilling my promises to my people,
including my pledge to engage in constructive interaction with the
world. ...
We must pay attention to the complexities of the issues at hand to
solve them. Enter my definition of constructive engagement. In a
world where global politics is no longer a zero-sum game, it is —
or should be — counterintuitive to pursue one’s interests without
considering the interests of others. A constructive approach to
diplomacy doesn’t mean relinquishing one’s rights. It means
engaging with one’s counterparts, on the basis of equal footing
and mutual respect, to address shared concerns and achieve shared
objectives. In other words, win-win outcomes are not just
favorable but also achievable. A zero-sum, Cold War mentality
leads to everyone’s loss.
Sadly, unilateralism often continues to overshadow constructive
approaches. Security is pursued at the expense of the insecurity
of others, with disastrous consequences. More than a decade and
two wars after 9/11, al-Qaeda and other militant extremists
continue to wreak havoc. Syria, a jewel of civilization, has
become the scene of heartbreaking violence, including chemical
weapons attacks, which we strongly condemn. In Iraq, 10 years
after the American-led invasion, dozens still lose their lives to
violence every day. Afghanistan endures similar, endemic
bloodshed.
The unilateral approach, which glorifies brute force and breeds
violence, is clearly incapable of solving issues we all face, such
as terrorism and extremism. I say all because nobody is immune to
extremist-fueled violence, even though it might rage thousands of
miles away. Americans woke up to this reality 12 years ago. ...
My approach to foreign policy seeks to resolve these issues by
addressing their underlying causes. We must work together to end
the unhealthy rivalries and interferences that fuel violence and
drive us apart. We must also pay attention to the issue of
identity as a key driver of tension in, and beyond, the Middle
East.
At their core, the vicious battles in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria
are over the nature of those countries’ identities and their
consequent roles in our region and the world. The centrality of
identity extends to the case of our peaceful nuclear energy
program. To us, mastering the atomic fuel cycle and generating
nuclear power is as much about diversifying our energy resources
as it is about who Iranians are as a nation, our demand for
dignity and respect and our consequent place in the world. Without
comprehending the role of identity, many issues we all face will
remain unresolved. ...
After 10 years of back-and-forth, what all sides don’t want in
relation to our nuclear file is clear. The same dynamic is evident
in the rival approaches to Syria.
This approach can be useful for efforts to prevent cold conflicts
from turning hot. But to move beyond impasses, whether in relation
to Syria, my country’s nuclear program or its relations with the
United States, we need to aim higher. Rather than focusing on how
to prevent things from getting worse, we need to think — and talk
— about how to make things better. To do that, we all need to
muster the courage to start conveying what we want — clearly,
concisely and sincerely — and to back it up with the political
will to take necessary action. This is the essence of my approach
to constructive interaction.
As I depart for New York for the opening of the U.N. General
Assembly, I urge my counterparts to seize the opportunity
presented by Iran’s recent election. I urge them to make the most
of the mandate for prudent engagement that my people have given me
and to respond genuinely to my government’s efforts to engage in
constructive dialogue. Most of all, I urge them to look beyond the
pines and be brave enough to tell me what they see — if not for
their national interests, then for the sake of their legacies, and
our children and future generations."<END QUOTE>
This is a pretty good article, fitting well into the "soaring
rhetoric" pattern that we've seen in some politicians' speeches,
though none recently. However, it contains little actual content.
What's most noticeable about it is that it contains none of the venom
of the op-eds by Putin and McCain, or of the speeches of Obama and
Assad. There are no inflammatory remarks about America or Israel, as
would certainly have been the case in an article by Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad. In the next week, Rouhani will begin to fill out his
rhetoric with actual policy positions, and then we'll see whether
"Heroic Flexibility" actually means anything. Washington Post
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Iran, Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei,
Heroic Flexibility, Ayatollah Sadegh Amoli Larijani,
Hassan Rouhani, Israel, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
Great Islamic Revolution, Iran/Iraq war
Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
16-Sep-13 World View -- India tests nuclear-capable long-range missile
Originally Posted by pbrower2a
