Forgiveness and our Iran Policy
Here's a radical idea; that we take seriously the whole concept of Christian forgiveness and apply it to our foreign policy with Iran.
In the Lord's Prayer we ask that our trangressions towards other be forgiven as we ask others to forgive ours. We all know how much of a challenge it is to forgive. We all know it is more blessed to give than recieve. That's why the Lord's prayer asks 1st for forgiveness of our transgressions, it frees us to then forgive others. That's the psychological basis of The Golden Rule.
Now let us summon up the courage to face, quite honestly, our history with Iran over the past half century or so. In the late 1890's a British oil company found significant oil reserves in Iran, set up shop and after concessions were granted in 1901, began to exploit those resources, mostly for their own profit. In 1933 improved terms were granted to Iran. During WW2 Reza Shah Pahlevi, seeking to gain greater control over his nations oil reserves from the British sided with the Axis powers which resulted in a British-Soviet Union occupation of the oil fields in 1941. Reza Shah Palevi abdicated. His son, Muhammad Reza Shah Palevi succeeded to the throne and adopted pro-Western policies. (This is the Shah we are most familiar with.)
After WW2 a pro-Soviet regime was removed from Azerbijan (then a NW province of Iran). In 1951 the Majles (Iran's parliment) passed an act, championed by the newly elected prime minister, Mohammad Mossadegh, a militant nationalist, nationalizing Iranian oil, which prompted the British oil company to withdraw. The resulting turmoil turned Mossadegh's victory into a defeat. In 1953 The Shah dismissed the prime minister and was defeated. The Shah fled to Rome. After 3 days of rioting Pro-Shah forces regained control and the Shah was returned to power and Mossadegh was imprisoned.
Behind all this upheavel was the direct intevention of American CIA agents. President Eisenhower decided that the forces of nationalism were too closely aligned with the Soviets and saw that as a direct threat to British-American interests. After many years of further turmoil, years in which the Shah imposed land reforms that included seizure of of lands owned by conservative Shiite Muslim leaders, in 1979 Shiite forces, lead from exile in Paris by the radical Shiite leader Ayatollah Khomeini, rose up and overthrew the Shah, initiating the present Iranian Revolution.
Now we Americans are all familiar with the 444 days of capture and release of 66 US American diplomats in 1979-80. It is this upon which our present foreign policy is so publically based. Yet it was the direct intervention of the CIA in 1953 that set the stage for much of this.
So a newly elected American president has a bold opportunity here. Quietly he could acknowledge America's role in Iran over the past half century, offer a carefully worded acknowledgment (which Iran could construe as an apology) and then ask for Iranian acknowledgment of their 1979 actions (which we then could construe to be an apology.)
We ask for forgiveness and then extend it to them. Gonna happen? Not likely but it would be a direct expression of our nation's Christian theology of forgiveness. This whole situation demonstrates how following Jesus' example, is in so many ways, indeed a real moral/spiritual challenge. With Iran about to obtain nuclear military capabilities and Israel readying a military reaction, someone of great moral courage must step up and set in place a new path to middle east peace.
If Sen. Obama is truly an agent of change then here is a golden opportunity to demonstrate it.
- anElder's blog
- Login or register to post comments












re: Iran, forgiveness
I think it's ironic -- or perhaps pathetic -- that those who are most likely to favor your radically Christian suggestion are non-religious leftists rather than Christians. Socialists of various sorts, Greens of varying shades, post-capitalist and anti-capitalist partisans, anti-global-corporatization activists, anti-imperialists (including some paleoconservatives on the right), anti-war activists, and the motley mass of dissident lefties of no particular ideological school are all more inclined to recognize national evils and to seek forgiveness -- and to propose restitution -- than are the generality of our good Christian folk.
To be the kind of agent of change that you propose, Rich, and that I would like to see, is probably seen by Obama as being much too risky. He's too busy moving to what currently passes as the center -- which I think is, in historical terms, more toward the center-right. It's hard to break out of well-worn political ruts
Bill