|
|
|
|
Book Review:
In Defense of Iran: Notes from a U.S. Peace Delegation’s Journey Through the Islamic Republic by Philip Wilayto
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviewed by Margaret Sarfehjooy, W A M M
|
|
The WAMM Middle East Committee hosted Phil Wilayto as part of his book tour on In Defense of Iran: Notes from a U.S. Peace Delegation’s Journey Through the Islamic Republic. This entertaining and well-researched book describes the tour of Iran Wilayto took with four other Virginia activists in 2007.
Wilayto’s goal is to set the record straight on “lies and propaganda constructed by the Washington politicians, the oil industry lobbyists, the bought-and-paid-for political pundits and the profit-driven commercial news media.” As Wilayto met with students, workers, goat herders, businesspeople, clerics, government officials, even members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, he found a country rich in culture and diversity, whose people were friendly and welcoming to Americans. While he heard an array of political opinions, with praise and criticism of their government’s policies, he didn’t hear any pleas to be saved by America nor did he find any interest in a military confrontation with the U.S.
Wilayto writes, “So the first thing to understand about Iran is that it can’t be judged solely by one standard. It has seen many invasions, many rebellions, many attempts at creating a truly free and democratic society. And it is a society that is perfectly capable of proceeding on that path, without “help” from the very countries that have in the past subverted its attempts at freedom. What it can use, especially in this difficult time, is determined solidarity from the progressive people of the world.”
Questions such as “Does Iran have nuclear weapons?” “Is Iran a threat to Israel?” “Does Iran support terrorism?” and others are answered with a combination of history, facts, scholarly journalism, and political analysis, all extensively researched.
Besides being a must-have for anyone who wants to learn about the history of Iran, U.S. involvement, and recent political changes, this book is full of fascinating insights and contradictions of this culturally rich, diverse and evolving country. Examples: Women must cover their hair, arms and legs, but 65 to 70 percent of university students are now women; women and men can use Iranian taxis, but women who prefer to ride without men can use a taxi company created only for women; abortion is illegal but Iran is the only country that requires couples to take a class on modern contraception before being issued a marriage license; Iran has become the adopted home for many Iraqi and Afghani refugees with 12.5 percent of Afghanistan’s 25 million people now living in Iran.
A veteran organizer whose activism has spanned the full range, from entrenched racism in the United States to Washington’s adventurism abroad, Wilayto offers keen observations on how Iran’s social reforms affect class structure. “Public education in Iran is free, up to and including the university level. Poverty has been reduced to one-eighth of what it was under the shah. Health care is free for those who can’t afford to pay. Small wonder that the poor—including poor women - tend to support the government, while the more secular and affluent middle class is the major source of anti-government resentment.”
Wilayto’s background in investigative journalism led him to uncover disturbing connections between wealthy, neo-conservative foundations and their financing of popular books and movies that reinforce negative stereotypes of Iranians. Some of his harshest criticism goes to Dr. Azar Nafisi, the author of the bestseller Reading Lolita in Tehran. Dr. Nafisi’s acknowledgment at the end of her book of a generous grant from the Smith Richardson Foundation raised red flags to Phil, who spent years researching and writing about neocon foundations and their role in shaping public opinion and government policies.
“Smith Richardson’s real issue, of course, isn’t democracy or women’s rights, but the fact that Iran pursues an independent foreign policy and defends its vast oil wealth from encroachments by multinational corporations. . . . Dr. Nafisi’s acknowledgment didn’t say just how “generous” Smith Richardson was, but a little digging turned up copies of the foundations’ annual reports. From 1998 to 2004, Dr. Nafisi received six grants totaling $675,500 from the Smith Richardson Foundation, Inc. Very generous indeed. . . . Why is this an issue? Because Dr. Nafisi’s heavily promoted portrayal of Iran helps create and reinforce the stereotype held by most people in the United States. That stereotype is reinforced by Western journalists and writers whose sources come from a relatively narrow, Western-oriented layer of Iranian society. The resulting false popular view of Iran then becomes the political context within which we evaluate current events.”
Reading Lolita in Tehran and other neocon-funded books and movies offer a biased, simplified view of Iran that is promoted by policy-makers, one that reinforces and encourages the belief of American superiority and exceptionialism that we (the U.S.) must “save” these repressed Iranian women from the terror of their own culture. Instead of focusing on our own eroding civil and human rights, we are encouraged to patronize, condemn, sanction, and attack a country whose people have a right to self-determination and are quite capable of reforming their own country. If more people read In Defense of Iran, they would gain a better understanding and appreciation of the Iranian culture and be able to refute the lies and propaganda that is preparing us for another war.
Phil Wilayto wrote, “The goal of this effort is to try and help the public understand, just as we were lied to about Iraq, resulting in an extremely costly and unjust war, we are now being lied to again, about Iran.” |
|
|
Cost of War
At least 140 soldiers committed suicide in 2008, according to the Army, a considerable increase compared with the 115 cases reported the previous year and the 102 documented in 2006. The number is the highest since the military started tracking suicide data in 1980. The Marine Corps, Navy and Air Force also reported an uptick in suicides last year.
The number of soldiers who committed suicide during the first few months of this year is on pace to surpass last year's figure.
The Army’s vice chief of staff, Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli, told lawmakers in April that at least 48 soldiers had committed suicide this year.
—Washington Post Foreign Service, Tuesday, May 12, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
© 2009 Women Against Military Madness. All rights reserved.
|
 |
|
Complete June 2009 Index - click here
|
|
 |
|
|
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
|
|
|
|
|
|
