Worldwide Java Jag: 2006-09-17

Friday, September 22, 2006

STATE OF DENIAL

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s arrival in New York and his speeches to the General Assembly and later to the Council on Foreign Relations were certainly interesting. Ahmadinejad reminds one of the yippies of old. He has sort of a Jerry Rubin/Abbie Hoffman political insouciance about him. His news conferences are a couscous of provocation, playfulness, and denial. He harangues, threatens, and questions in an effortless, seamless manner that throws the linear-burdened diplomatic world into a tizzy.
Certainly compared to G.W., whose inarticulate pondering and sermonizing is completely off-putting, our Iranian nemesis has the clear advantage. He is the Muhammad Ali while Bush is Sonny Liston. The truth and diplomacy are only tangentially connected anyway, so that in reality neither he nor Bush can walk the walk.
Actually, the two of them have a lot in common, so it’s hard to understand their antipathy. First off, both are in office by fraud. There is little difference between the guardian council in Iran and the U.S. Supreme Court when it comes to certifying candidates and election results. Unelected old men throw the votes to their boy…the public be damned. There is not much difference between the balloting in Florida and Ohio and in Tehran. Disenfranchisement, balloting irregularities, and a political decision to finalize the outcome are some of the common themes. Also in common, both men place religion at the center of their universes. Centuries after the Enlightenment, both govern as if a medieval church had sanctified their rule.
Both claim God’s blessing at every turn and both believe that they can bypass every law, every civil canon, every human right in order to please God and carry out their policies. Both are big on torture. Both have alienated the vast majority of their young people and have raised the despair level of their opposition to new heights.
Capitalizing on these similarities, there is a germ of political technique that Bush can learn from Ahmadinejad that could forever change his political fortunes. It’s the Iranian leader’s use of denial. Let’s look at how Ahmadinejad uses denial as a keystone in his policy formulation. Take the Holocaust, for example. First he denies it ever happened. It was all fabricated, a tale told by the Zionists in order to occupy Arab lands. Then later and very cleverly he says it “was exaggerated”—if it happened it was not of the scale of six million, perhaps it “was two.” Then if it was two, it was two “out of sixty,” so why focus on this tiny group. Then, and he has said this many times but reiterated it during his council meeting, “the whole question of the Holocaust needs further study.”
Deconstructing this thought process reveals it to be a three-step dance of evasion. First start with outright denial, then move on to minimization, and then just throw up your hands and call for further study.
Here is how George can adapt these infuriating yet clever maneuvers. Let’s say at the end of the day, after all the Iranian stalling and deception, we need to stop Iran from building a nuclear bomb. Let’s say we collectively decide to reduce their capability through a military campaign. Let’s say this is an air and missile attack lasting several weeks. Here is how Bush can do it. Below is a rehearsal for the press conference G.W. will give.

Question: Mr. President, what made you decide to bomb Iran now?
Answer: We have not bombed Iran.

Q: But Mr. President, it has been reported by millions of people that planes and missiles have attacked buildings all over Iran.
A: I don’t think that ever happened.

Q: But Mr. President, newspapers and television all over the world have shown pictures of the destruction…of the smoking ruins, the injured and dead people.
A: Look, this has all been grossly exaggerated. Even if the bombing did happen, what’s a few buildings, a few people? All over the world there are bombings and dead people… this century alone over a hundred million people have died and millions of buildings have been destroyed, why bother about a few more? Why focus on this small event—why not look at the destruction in World Wars I and II? Why does the world always focus on Iran?

Q: (Now accompanied by apoplectic stuttering) But Mr. President, the Iranian industrial infrastructure is in ruins and they have threatened to attack Israel and the U.S.
A: Look, this whole thing needs further study.… Thank you very much.

Delivered with a wink and a nod, Bush can take Ahmadinejad’s playbook and turn it on its ear. Let the same critics that have given Ahmadinejad a free pass squirm when G.W. does it. It’s time for Bush to learn a lesson or two from the man from Tehran when dealing with fantasists.