(This is Part 2 of a series. Go back to Part 1.)
Let's look at the current relationship between the United States and Iran. Interestingly, according to published reports, each thinks of the other as a force of darkness. Or rather, the government of each country regards its counterpart in the other country that way.
Conversely, each government thinks of itself as the forces of light. The ruling powers in Iran don't go to bed at night thinking that they're evil. On the contrary, according to their statements, they think of themselves as fighting for goodness in fiercely opposing the evil U.S. and its genocidal imperialist policies. And across the Atlantic, members of the Bush administration go to bed at night thinking that, whether we win or lose, we're fighting on the side of good in opposing terrorist nations.
The problem with Manichean thinking is that it tends to cut off all dialogue. As Vice President Cheney has said, "We don't talk with evil, we crush it." As a consequence, the U.S. is not talking with Iran. It is also not talking with North Korea, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas. We're not talking with "evil." And guess what?—that's exactly how they think of it too. One has only to read some of the online foreign papers to realise that, from their point of view, they're also not talking with "evil" —that is, us, the U.S.
Dialogue is not always the answer—on rare occasions it just appeases —but almost always it's a lot better than the alternatives. Because a true dialogue opens up the possibility of seeing that the other side has some grievances and/or interests that may be legitimate.
Perhaps even more important, it may begin to humanise the opponents' views of each other. Instead of seeing each other one-dimensionally, each can begin to see the other in a more rounded, Shakespearean way, a perception that allows for shades of gray and some truth on both sides.
Iran describes itself as defending Muslim honor against the oil-thirsty manipulations of the West, as well as standing up for the oppressed Palestinians against the "state terror" of Israel and its sponsor. And the U.S. sees itself as defending its interests at home and abroad from the terrorist actions associated with "rogue" movements and states.
Dialogue could help each side begin to see how the other side might feel justisfied in its storyline, and that there may be some glimmers of truth in both of the storylines.
(This is the end of Part 2. Go to Part 3.)
—jim sloman, 11.2.06
|
