Today's Gold Medal Iran "Expert": Jim Hoagland of the Washington Post

The Latest from Iran (30 August): Parliament Discusses the Cabinet

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

This week we've noted that the editorial board of The Washington Post are now only viewing post-election opposition in Iran through their looking glass of Tehran And The Bomb. However, the newspaper may have set a new low for "expert" analysis when it turned Jim Hoagland loose to psychoanalyse the Iranian nation.

Usually, you can treat Hoagland's opinion ramblings as a megaphone for the US officials who have been priming him with the "right line". This time, however, he appears to have made this up all on his own:

Iranians live in a culture of negotiation, much as Americans venerate entrepreneurship or the French value style and elegance. The act of negotiating, for Iranians, is a high art and the ultimate framework for all human interaction. Arriving at a quick, clear outcome based on compromise is amateurish and rude, if not unpatriotic.

Hoagland can say this with authority because 1) he watched an Abbas Kiarostami movie and 2) well, that's it really. No matter. Just pull his one-size-fits-all psychoanalytic sweater over the head of the political conflict in Iran after 12 June:

Even the power struggle going on in Iran has taken on many traits of a negotiation between the rulers and the dissidents. Fraudulent elections, protests, Stalinist show trials and staggering human rights abuses have given rise to a national dialogue about the Islamic republic's outdated institutions -- particularly the office of Supreme Guide occupied by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Not sure whether those who appeared in the Tehran courtroom this week would consider the process a "dialogue". And I'm thinking that President Ahmadinejad, the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps, the Ministry of Intelligence, and the security forces, amongst others, might be thanking Expert Jim for reducing the struggle to the "Supreme Guide". Still, we can rest assured that Hoagland's Magical Looking Glass can bring the ultimate issue of the last 2 1/2 months into view:

In the end...[the regime] will have to be able to communicate to its people that Iran has not given up the instrument that guarantees a continuing place at the top negotiating table -- the capability to build a nuclear weapon.

Oh, yes, it's all about The Bomb.

Next week: Jim Hoagland draws deeply from a narghile pipe to tell us why Iranians seem to talk an awful lot.

Comments

[Twitter Trackbacks for Today’s]

[...] Today’s Gold Medal Iran “Expert”: Jim Hoagland of the Washington Post | Enduring America enduringamerica.com/2009/08/30/todays-gold-medal-iran-expert-jim-hoagland-of-the-washington-post – view page – cached The Latest from Iran (30 August): Parliament Discusses the Cabinet Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? — From the page [...]

[Amy]

The concept of "national character" has been defunct since around the middle of the last century, but it allows the user to avoid dealing with messy inconveniences like human beings. Clearly Hoagland's analysis of Iran comes from a head which has spent the last 3 months in an orifice where the sun never shines.

I have to disagree with Scott's statement:

Usually, you can treat Hoagland’s opinion ramblings as a megaphone for the US officials who have been priming him with the “right line”.

Maybe Hoagland was a mouthpiece for officials of the last admin (till it went soft on him), but with regard to Obama, he uses his slimy innuendos to fabricate a reality that suits his agenda: Note how he characterizes Obama's offer to engage:

Letting Gaddafi off the hook was an implicit feature of the 2003 plea bargain that George W. Bush and Tony Blair struck with the Libyan leader to get Tripoli to end its nuclear and chemical weapons programs and help roll up terrorist networks it had previously supported.

But it is not too late to apply lessons from that plea bargaining to President Obama's determination to reach a somewhat similar arrangement with Iran.

[Bijan]

It would be nice if these "experts" on Iranian culture actually KNEW Iranians and spent time with them versus trying to psychoanalyze an entire culture based on what likely amounts to a couple hours worth of information gathering to support his conclusion.

[whereismyvote]

I guess Scott E. was kind to Mr. Hoagland when he said that Mr. Hoagland's analysis has derived from watching a Kiarostami movie. I doubt someone of this character would understand, yet alone have the patience to watch a Kiarostami movie in its entirety.

This man has seen someone haggling for a carpet, and thinks all Iranians spend all their day and night haggling for carpets. He doesn't realize that we buy our carpets with a 30 to 50 year perspective of time. In other words, we may only buy 5 carpets in our lifetime?

The second statement is almost more offensive as the first. It concludes that Iranian people expect their state to have the ace up its sleeve to ensure good negotiation results, as that's what we all live for.... Let me clarify, ultimately the state has to show its people that its peoples opinion matter and that they have bread on the tables and representative government, with basic services.

It seems that this person thinks that people all over the world think of us Iranians as bomb mad crazy men that want to haggle to death... Where as Hoagland is clearly expressing the opinion of the American Jewish lobby, who is madly holding to 200 plus bombs, has threatened Iran and its neighbours almost monthly and is haggling with its friend USA over every detail of its road map to peace.

Well before I would have said that these tactics don't work, and won't stick. However, I so clearly remember that America twice elected Bush Jr. so now I am resigned to believe anything can stick in America.

[Amy]

whereismyvote
In America, people of a certain mindset exploit the scary lie to great advantage, counting on the media to get it repeated loudly & often. It's not necessary to convince people that the lie is true. The goal is to create doubt and worry. If the subject is scary, and doubt is introduced, people will opt not to take a chance.

George Bush obtained his 2nd term this way (if he actually won the state of Ohio, but don't get me started). The tactic is great for international affairs because most folk can't rely on personal experience in that area, but the same people use it shamelessly whenever the opportunity presents itself. Our current debate on health care reform is a typical case.

[whereismyvote]

@ Amy

I read your description with detail, and in many cases if I substitute America for Iran and the specifics of health care for another subject, it sounds very closely to the tactics used by our own goons Mr. AN et. al. in my native Iran...

Seems that as great students of America, we have learnt very well all the bad points of our teacher, yet never learnt anything about the good things.

To end on a positive note, I hope we can learn more from your country about the value of humanity, respect for law and the vote of the people, and even a thing or two maybe about democracy along the way. That would make it a better trade-off......

[Amy]

@ whereismyvote
I hope so too, even though we have far to go ourselves.

In Iran, it seems like abiding by the rule of law would go a long way... adhering to the Constitution and having the same law apply to all people in the same way. I don't know how sound your Constitution is on human rights, but from what I've read, the existing human rights provisions are being violated on many fronts.

[whereismyvote]

Yes Amy

We need better obligation to stand by and uphold the laws we have on book and enforce them rather than a new constitution. All constitutions are aper thin, until the people and law makers and power brokers are forced to abide by them. In Iran we have so many people who see the constitution and the law as the servants of their means and objectives as the other way around. In simple terms we have this whole class that is above the law, They even manipulate it to their own end/

Iran legal system is shy of a joke. 30 Years after the revolution we still have revolution court. What does this mean? revolution court was created with a mandate to prosecute the old rulers and the people against the revolution at its inception. 30 Years later it means we still have either failed or that we still need to operate outside the rule of law and the systems.

[Amy]

whereismyvote
Our system is a long way from perfect. For example, people with money can afford better lawyers & often get lighter sentences. A white collar worker who runs a scam & steals millions of dollars is likely to spend less time in jail than somebody who robs a convenience store for $50. After Abu Ghraib, the low ranking soldiers who committed the offenses were prosecuted but higher ranking officials were not held accountable. Violence, especially gang violence, is common in jails.

Injustice is unacceptable, but, on the other hand, no system is infallible. We fall short all the time. We are still working on it.

[whereismyvote]

I wish we could say the same. At times in Iran it seems we are working to make the system more unjust. At least America is incrementally improving.....

All that you say is true, of America, but I would take my chances with a poor, cheap, public defendant lawyer in front of a US judge to a run in Tehran in front of a Mullah (Judge) whose palms I have greased, with a top notch lawyer, and my family name behind me. I know I have a better chance of winning in USA.

In Iran we just try and avoid the whole legal system. There is only injustice when you get involved in it..... We envy America for what we could and should be, yet we hate it for what we are..... Its a pity.

[Amy]

It truly is a pity. We have a great deal to offer each other if we could sit down at the same table.