Hicham Bou Nassif/Why the Zarif leaks are a scandal to “anti-Imperialist” American academia/هشام بوناصيف: تسريبات ظريف هي فضيحة للأكاديميين الأمريكيين المناهضين للإمبريالية
Why the Zarif leaks are a scandal to “anti-Imperialist” American academia Hicham Bou Nassif/May 02/2021 هشام بوناصيف: تسريبات ظريف هي فضيحة للأكاديميين الأمريكيين المناهضين للإمبريالية
I was having dinner at an Indiana restaurant after defending my thesis in August 2014. What was supposed to be an uneventful last night in Bloomington prior to taking my first job in Minnesota turned into yet another hot debate with a staunch leftwing American scholar who was defending Barak Obama’s Iran policy as a smart strategy aiming at strengthening the “moderate wing” in the Iranian regime; I was denying it existed in the first place. That evening was another iteration of a dynamic that had unfolded several times before, and did so again since: an American scholar berates my allegedly “hawkish” foreign policy views while I secretly question the use of academic training when facts are flippantly brushed off the moment they threaten her/his ideological beliefs.
The truth is this: any quick review of Iranian foreign policy since Khomeini’s power grab does not reveal that moderates have influence over Iran’s foreign policy, assuming they exist at all within the ruling elite. In 1979/1980, Khomeini repeatedly called upon Iraqis to overthrow the Saddam Hussein regime. That was playing with fire, considering the demographics of Iraq, the complexities of the sectarian question in it, and the personality of Saddam Hussein, whom Khomeini knew well as a former Iranian exiled leader in Iraq. Sure enough, the Iran-Iraq war began in 1980 and ushered in 8 years of carnage between the two countries.
Where was the “moderate wing” when Khomeini was essentially prodding Iraq into war? Or when suicide bombers killed hundreds of American Marines and French paratroopers in Beirut, in 1983? Or when Hezbollah operatives assassinated the Lebanese Prime Minister Rafic Hariri in 2005? Or when Bashar al-Asad unleashed terror on Syrian civilians with Iran’s full backing, as of 2011? These are mere examples and one could go and on. Simply put: there is no empirical evidence suggesting that moderates carry weight in the process of Iran’s foreign policy decision-making. And yet, the “moderate wing” argument is systematically brandished in any Iran-related discussion on American campuses.
The recent Javad Zarif leaks make him essentially look like the clown he is. There goes a minister of foreign affairs who basically knows what goes on in his country’s foreign policy only after the fact. In his leaks, Zarif complained repeatedly about the “security structure” of his own ministry: Iranian diplomats are more spies and revolutionary guards’ agents, than actual diplomats. Qassem Suleimani, the slain leader of the revolutionary guard, did not always bother inform Zarif about what he was up to. By Zarif’s own admission, the deep state in Iran calls the shot while he is left to play a clownish role on the world scene. And where is in all that the “moderate wing” that American academia is so feverishly defending, and waiting for? Playing cards with Godot I suppose.
In theory, the Zarif leaks should be an occasion for many on the left in American campuses to review Iran-related assumptions scandalously divorced from reality. This, however, is unlikely to happen. Too much passion and ideological commitments stand in the way. Had views expressed on campus remained in it, this wouldn’t be a problem. But when American foreign policy decision-making is contaminated by this kind of witchcraft, then tragedy awaits. That Syrians were left for the Asad/Iran axis to slaughter under the Obama administration is a case in point.
Currently, my heart goes for the Afghanis who may yet again fall under the Taliban’s yoke, after the last American soldier had left their country. Leftists are of course applauding the Biden move in Afghanistan – just as they had applauded Obama’s in Syria.
If I learned anything about them after 12 years spent in three American campuses, it is this: Repercussions on the lives of actual human beings will not matter; and ideological sloganeering will never stop.
