Response 2

There were an abundance of topics to reflect on this week pertaining to the MENA region- revolutions, countries announcing political positions/ support, protests, and the United Nations General Assembly all played into a busy week. After watching the Piers Morgan and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad interview, I found myself very confused as to my stance on Iran. For quite some time, I was told and led to think that Iran was a terrible player in world politics and often took extremist sides. I was incredibly surprised to find myself frequently agreeing with Ahmadinejad. Perhaps he is a smooth politician, or perhaps I am just too naïve, but many of the points he made seemed to correlate with my beliefs. On the subject of nuclear development, Ahmadinejad said that their program was purely for peaceful purposes. While I first thought, “Yeah, sure. Peaceful nukes?”, I later realized that nuclear development has indeed led to peace. If the Soviet Union had not had the threat of nuclear power, the United States may have taken a more aggressive approach during the Cold War.

Other stances Ahmadinejad voiced that I agree with are some of his views on Syria, Jews, and Palestinian statehood. While he is a friend of Al-Assad’s, whose policies I am not a fan of, Ahmadinejad agreed that the violence must end. "We do believe that freedom, the right to choose, the right to vote, respect and justice is the fundamental right of all people. All people must obtain these rights. No one has the right to restrict a people and nation, but we believe as a friend of nations, we must help the nations around the world to obtain these rights through peaceful paths, though peaceful actions." When asked if he would allow his children to marry a Jew, he responded that he would have to meet the person, but that love spanned across race. He declined to take a side on whether Palestine should be granted statehood, but instead said that it is a decision the people of Palestine must make for themselves. He went on to make some comments about homosexuality and the Holocaust that I very much disagree with, but overall, I was quite surprised with the overlap of thoughts. Though what he says sounds good, it’s possible that these are just words. I’m not particularly knowledgeable on corruption within Iran, but I know that their slate isn’t exactly clean. While I’d love for him to stick to his words- help end Syrian violence, encourage interfaith cooperation, and allow for democratic peace, I’m doubt they will come to fruition. However, this interview did change my opinion that Ahmadinejad was an entirely radical player. I’m certainly not saying that I agree with his policies, but his short speech, even if he didn’t write it himself, allowed me to see that my perceptions of Iran had been unjustly skewed.