Trapped in Iran: My Summer as a Guest of the Revolutionary Guards(1843magazine.com) |
Trapped in Iran: My Summer as a Guest of the Revolutionary Guards(1843magazine.com) |
That said - 2017 was, in retrospect, a pretty easy time to visit Iran, and I wouldn't risk it now given the events of the last few months. But I very much hope to be able to go back.
I can confirm what several others here are saying - Tehran is a cosmopolitan, fascinating city, and Iranians are wonderful, on the whole. Some of the biggest surprises for me were
1) the religious and cultural pluralism on display - I saw Zoroastrian temples, synagogues, and plenty of churches (with the prominent exception of Bahá'i, who are forced to live in the shadows). Not to mention that the vast majority of Iranians I talked to about religion were on the atheist-agnostic spectrum, although they participate in religious holidays and customs in much the same way that my lapsed Catholic family did when I was growing up.
2) How much Iranians like American culture, and how connected they are to it by friends and family who live in the US. I knew this from before, of course, but it was surreal to be, say, talking to an older couple in a tiny provincial village and end up discussing their favorite taquerias in Orange County (that really happened to me). Or the kids in a mall who insisted on taking a bunch of selfies with me when they found out I was from the US.
Anyway, I found the whole trip to be extraordinary and came away from it convinced that, on the level of culture and society if not our current governments, Americans and Iranians are natural allies. I hope for a future where that can happen.
The irony here is that if you weren't American, this trip would have cost you visa-free access to America.
How did you manage that? I thought that it was required for American citizens to have a tour guide with them at all times. Did you get some sort of non-tourist visa that allowed that to happen?
Do they still operate or are they remnants of pre-revolutionary times? I don't see how they can operate in a state whose publicly stated goal is to "wipe Israel from the face of the Earth".
My cousin in Tehran introduced me to games like Counterstrike, Grim Fandango, and Battlefield, which got me into PC gaming, which got me into open source game scripting. We spent a few summers in Tehran, and there was this electronics bazaar called Paytakht[1] that I'd always beg my mom to take me to. They had everything from motherboards and CPUs to cracked versions of Photoshop to iPhone screen repairs.
Cosmopolitan Iranians are stuck in a strange situation: a majority resent the current regime for a litany of reasons (repressing religious minorities in Iran, regressive attitudes toward women, corruption, economic stagnation and inflation, the list goes on) - but they also resent the US and UK governments for denying them a chance at being a secular democracy[2]. They don't want to be the next Iraq, or the next Libya, or the next Afghanistan, either.
OTOH, because of this conflict between the people and their government, many Iranians see a country's actions as not representative of the sentiments of its people. This (plus Iran's hospitality culture) is why, despite the political tensions, Americans generally get treated very well in Iran. It's also likely why most people the author of this article interacted with treat him with an air of "I'm sorry, it's not personal." When it comes to Islamic fundamentalism in Tehran, only a vocal minority's hearts are really in it.
[1] Still exists! https://fastly.4sqi.net/img/general/width960/38765094_bQrfJd...
[2] If you want to understand US/Iran relations at all, you need to know about the 1953 coup and its after-effects: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta...
As a US passport holder with no relation to Iran or Israel, it was easy enough to visit, although you are under the watch of your state-sanctioned minder the entire time as the author eluded to. Going through immigration on arrival, I was detained for about an hour while they presumably were examining my documents, but every encounter I had with police was fairly cordial if not a bit unprofessional.
Once inside, it is indeed a vibrant place. Tehran has a booming nightlife, and outside the gaze of the religious police people were living quite freely (especially in the Armenian or jewish communities). It seems they go to great lengths to do everything as privately as possible, as to not attract the attention of the morality police, allowing them to save face. Young people were quite adamantly secular, and apologetic for their theocratic government. You definitely get the impression that citizens feel the government doesn't represent them at all.
I'm not sure I plan on returning, but I'd certainly encourage curious people to visit as there is a lot worth seeing.
US gov contributed to destabilizing the country because they wanted to keep a tight grip on oil.
This is how Iran looked in the 50s, before the coup: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=iran+in+the+50s&atb=v164-1&iax=ima...
His video about Iran is heartwarming.
Cities in the south and northwest are more pleasurable.
Take places like Shiraz, Tabriz (to name a few common examples) for example. They are something to behold! And in the north, squished between the Caspian Sea and the Alborz mountains, you will even find temperate rain forests.
Plenty of Iranians live in the US or western countries.
So maybe I should've said that I wish more Iranians could come to our country safely and easily.
The recent pushback against the regime in the days following the recent soleimani killing should have led to more support from the public in the US. Sadly, since doing so would 'align' them with Trump's anti-regime rhetoric, many people who so eagerly donned green avatars on Twitter many years ago decided to stay silent and ignore it. I don't think people in the US think of the regime and public as the same entity, but I do think that the US's public support of Iran's counter-regime forces will be fickle as long as Trump supports those forces.
Without fail, every single person that has been to Iran rates it their number one country, and the one they most want to go back to. The people are so friendly, the culture so rich, the landscape and architecture so stunning.
I absolutely can not wait to go.
[0] theroadchoseme.com/expedition-overview
[1] theroadchoseme.com/africa-expedition-overview
https://apnews.com/c5348f244a6b484fa3678f39a12e3ceb
I remember seeing a clip of an Iranian leader saying every journalist is a spy and if they aren't they should be because they "don't get paid enough". Gives you insight into their thinking, or what happens when you give the hyper-paranoid intelligence agency people way too much power (which the west isn't immune too).
It's also why these organizations are so dysfunctional. All of these machinations stand in direct contrast to the principles of effective management. Transparency, alignment of incentives, pooling of resources, cross-training expertise, and clear communication are all impossible to achieve in that kind of environment.
The difference between Tony Soprano and Jeff Bezos is that if you stab Tony Soprano in the back, you have a pretty good shot at becoming Tony Soprano. Same story holds true for authoritarian regimes. In democracies, the mandate to rule comes from popular approval. Simply conspiring to depose the ruler is not a viable path to power. Yet in Iran, China or Russia there's nothing to stop this besides fear and paranoia in the regime.
In a healthy org, it'd be nuts to have two divisions working at cross-purposes against each other. Yet in mafias, we see this kind of behavior all the time. For example, Hitler was notorious for giving different generals contradictory orders. Clearly it has some adaptive utility within that context.
As a detainee/possible hostage, he's in the category of a guest who is not free to leave, and not a prisoner who has been convicted of a crime.
It's very important in Persian culture to treat guests well, better than your own family members if possible.
What he describes, being put in a decent hotel, having his expenses covered, and being free to explore the city in a sort of mandatory extended vacation, is characteristic of Persian culture. I'm pretty sure he is aware of the protocol and thus was never too concerned for himself.
Or, perhaps, he knows his own feelings better than random commentators on the Internet?
I also think it's important to distinguish between the government and the people. It can be easy to see them as one and the same, but that would be a mistake.
Peter Santenello opened my eyes to Iran. I couldn't believe how pro-America so many Iranians are; the culture seems so rich, and the people so pleasant.
I highly, highly, highly recommend you check out Peter's vlog series in Iran (https://www.youtube.com/user/santenello?app=desktop).
To a degree they are one and the same though. The government still requires the consent of the governed.
Only heard similar opinions, which really makes me want to visit. Three female friends of mine went together and they loved it even though there is this omnipresence of the religious police, reminding them to cover up.
The stories they told me of how friendly people are and the things that go on behind closed doors makes it sound like a fascinating place.
"House parties"? That happens to be something I hear about a lot from young Iranians that come to the US for school. My understanding is "house parties" are essentially the only time young men/women can socialize together. I also understand sometimes even alcohol will appear at house parties which again I understand to be at least taboo if not outright illegal generally.
I would like to go too. Unfortunately, I also travel frequently to the US and visiting Iran would make further trip to the US potentially problematic.
And I'm from Germany...
I don't think I would not get a visa at an embassy.
I absolutely loved it - it's a large and often beautiful country, of which I only scratched the surface. The people were without exception polite and friendly, and the food was simply amazing.
Friends that have been on expeditions there kayaking and trekking have been shot at and robbed, but but the pictures do look pretty. I did a self supported kayaking trip to the far east of turkey near Erzurum which is pretty near the border and I assume it would be pretty similar. Very friendly people, great food and scenery.
If you're looking for ethical integrity, you should probably stop turning to spy shows for it. They are loud, dumb, and tend to be sickeningly nationalistic.
And the commissioners whole schtick is principled, conservative law-and-order...
our politicians do the same thing.
Madam Secretary [0] was propaganda for Hillary Clinton
Diary of a Future President [1] is propaganda for Michelle Obama
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madam_Secretary_(TV_series) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diary_of_a_Future_President
I look forward to seeing some evidence that Diary of a Future President is a cynical piece of propaganda designed to aid the fortunes of Michelle Obama, in order to restore a bit of my faith in humanity.
Do you really think russia is killing "journalists" because they are journalists or because they are spies or worse? Do you think the Saudi's killed kashoggi because he was just a "journalist" or because he was something else? Every major news/media organization in the world ( west, east, south , north ) are tied to the state. Whether you talk about the NYTimes or BBC or Xinhua or RT or Al Jazeera or [fill in the blank], they are all state organizations.
Of course this doesn't mean all journalists are spies. Most are just mindless grunts working for a paycheck like everyone else. But the journalists who are sent to iran, china, russia, etc are more likely than not tied to the state in one way or another.
The data also seems to suggest that antisemitism is more prevalent in Iran than in a lot of other countries: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/90093/1/MPRA_paper_90093.pdf
A final analysis then shows the extent of Antisemitism in different countries of the world, ranked by denominational groups, and based on the World Values Survey data. While in our 28 countries with complete data Protestants in Uruguay, Canada, and Argentina and Roman Catholic regular Sunday Mass Church attenders in Argentina, Canada and the United States are the major denominational communities with the lowest global rates of Antisemitism, Muslims in India, Iran and Iraq are the most antisemitic religious groupings of the world.
Briefly, the anger felt by Iranians is due to their support for their fellow Muslims, the Palestinians, and their extreme mistreatment at the hands of the Israeli government. Note this support even though Iranians are Shia and Palestinians are Sunni.
To answer b.) both Israel and Saudi Arabia view Iran and an enemy due to a regional power struggle, where Iran stands in opposition to both. The promotion of Iran as Public Enemy #1 in the ME says more about maximalist Zionist power projection, and Natanyahu's lust for power than anything else. For example, Iran was abiding by the JCPOA, as verified by IAEA inspectors, while Natanyahu was inciting action against Iran, as rapproachment was not in his interests. The canard here is that Natanyahu was claiming Iran was trying to make nuclear weapons and that was unacceptable, despite the fact that Israel already has a well-known but never publicly acknowledged nuclear arsenal, and are famously not a part of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Even with nuclear weapons it is ridiculous to think that the Iranians do not understand the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction vis a vis Israel.
Yes, we see how angry they are when the extreme mistreatment of Syrian Sunnis or Chinese Uighur. Ah, wait, they even take part in the former. They do a fine job of making it appear the real issue is religious.
"For example, Iran was abiding by the JCPOA, as verified by IAEA inspectors,"
JCPOA and UNSC 2231 included far more than IAEA inspections, and Iran was NOT abiding by the other issues (ballistic missiles, heavy water, keeping a spare set of nuclear tubes for Arak, etc.).
People mostly repeat IAEA because they are unaware of the other issues, or that the deal had time limits on most inspection issues. Some are aware but prefer to elide it.
"The canard here is that Natanyahu was claiming Iran was trying to make nuclear weapons and that was unacceptable, despite the fact that Israel already has a well-known but never publicly acknowledged nuclear arsenal"
Israel isn't threatening to destroy Iran, it's the other way around.
"Even with nuclear weapons it is ridiculous to think that the Iranians do not understand the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction vis a vis Israel."
Some Iranian don't[0]. If you want to entrust the safety of the world to that, well...
[0] https://www.memri.org/reports/former-iranian-president-rafsa...
"When can’t I use the VWP (ESTA) and need a visa?
Due to personal circumstances:
you traveled to certain countries (Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Syria, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen on or after March 1, 2011)"
Apparently the hospitality is so "strong" in Iran you have to almost argue or tell lies to not end up in a different stranger's house every night.
A friend of mine here is an Iraqi refugee, when I met him I was amazed at how cosmopolitan and cultured he is. Like more so than anyone I know here.
It's very humbling to experience all that especially when all we see on TV is screaming religious nutbags.
Funny I have gotten the same exact detail from numerous such stories/descriptions.
>But "if people find out we're in deep shit".
I understood it to be an open secret; however, (secret) police are a very real concern and can show up.
> I also understand sometimes even alcohol will appear at house parties which again I understand to be at least taboo if not outright illegal generally.
I have a very strong aversion regarding breaking laws, especially if I'm at the mercy of a foreign government.
That sounds like hell on Earth for me.
Given that you're already crossing the line by going to one of these parties, and in trouble if you're found out anyway, you might as well go the whole hog. Cocaine is prohibited, and weed, but so is alcohol. Orgies and adultery and sodomy and BDSM are prohibited, but so is vanilla sex or just being alone with someone of the opposite sex that you're not married to.
The line is drawn so close that it's nearly impossible not to cross it. There are no moral graduations (no shades of gray, as it were) beyond that line anymore. And if you're a sinner anyway, you might as well enjoy it as much as you can.
The more repressed the country, the wilder the (unofficial) parties.
The article also mentioned that the buildings are unadorned from the outside, and that the website for the synagogue he attended had text on it condemning the Israeli government for the 2008 Gaza atrocities, so it's not completely unencumbered.
(Note: I'm obviously leaving aside the issue of the Palestinians, which is not exactly about religion but about ethnicity/nationality/sovereignty.)
I haven’t been to either but would have expected Israel to be better again.
But why don't you take Khamenei's own words, literally from his Twitter account: "Our stance against Israel is the same stance we have always taken. #Israel is a malignant cancerous tumor in the West Asian region that has to be removed and eradicated: it is possible and it will happen." [1]
Or a random sampling of the same stated objective through the times:
"Israel should be wiped off map, says Iran's president" - The Guardian [2]
"Referring to comments by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic revolution, Admadinejad said, "As the imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map."" - NY Times [3]
"Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Naqdi, who leads the Basij volunteer force, made the declaration to mark Islamic Republic Day in Tehran on Tuesday. “Wiping Israel off the map is not up for negotiation,”" The Independent [4]
This is not a single statement or an off-hand remark - it's made consistently, publicly and empathetically by many representatives of the Iranian regime, without retraction or contextualisation afterwards, throughout the entire history of the regime.
These statements must be taken as a credible articulation of the objectives of Iran - and considered in the context of their goals of obtaining nuclear weapons.
As for the article, I would love to visit Iran, but they are grabbing Western tourists willy nilly, accusing them of being spies etc., so that won't be happening.
[1] https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir/status/1003332853525110784
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/oct/27/israel.iran
[3] https://www.nytimes.com./2005/10/27/world/africa/wipe-israel...
[4] https://www.jpost.com/International/Merkels-govt-says-Irans-...
https://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/27/world/africa/wipe-israel-...
Even wikipedia admits that:
"A referendum on the dissolution of Parliament, the first referendum ever held in Iran, was held in August 1953. The dissolution was approved by more than 99% of voters."
"99% of voters". This was the coup of Dr. Mossadegh and that ridiculous number is exhibit A.
"The balloting was not secret and there were two separate voting booths, i.e. the opponents of Mossadegh had to cast their vote in a separate tent.[7][1] Critics pointed that the referendum had ignored the democratic demand for secret ballots."
Sounds democratic to me. (Actually reminds me of the referendum of Ayatollah Khomeini -- I remember it vividly. I went with my uncle to the polling station. Two boxes in the room, clearly marked for and against, with dear "brothers" from the Komiteh with the G3s assault rifles slung over their shoulders watching over the process.)
Care to guess how many of those who virtue signal by bringing up '53 are aware of the "democratically elected" Dr. Mossadegh's "emergency powers"?
Even fewer know that the good Dr. was a member of the aristocracy of the deposed and despised Qajar dynasty.
Of course non-Iranians are welcome to their opinions, but it is entirely reassuring to this former Iranian that "Pahlavi" has become the rallying cry of Iranian youth.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1980/03/23/t...
This apologist article damns the Shah with faint praise- perhaps there had been improvements under the Pahlavis in the latter days of the regime, but there were flagrant abuses under the SAVAK secret police in the early '70s to 1976- in engaging in such brutality, and in botching the land reform of the White Revolution, Mohammad Reza tied his own noose.
But speaking of "angels", I'd say SAVAK was angelic compared to CIA, MI6, MOSSAD & KGB and their record of "brutality".
p.s. Regrettably you likely do not speak Farsi, but this BBC Persian show brings together a former SAVAK, National Front, and Fadeyeen Khalgh (militant terrorist Left) gentlemen including the historian who wrote a quite interesting book on Sabeti (SAVAK thinking end) and it is interesting how at the end of episode 2 they all wonder at how they agree that the poor "evil" "fascist" "puppet" Shah's regime was far far more civilized and gentle than the actual thugs of the so called Islamic Republic of Iran.
The looseness of the restrictions could kind of help because it gives people an outlet so it's not so bad they're ready to take up arms but the regime still has a ready cudgel to charge people with.
I am not saying that the government and the people are entirely the same, but I am saying that you can't just divorce them from one another.
This is decidedly untrue. Venezuela, North Korea, and many other counterexamples exist.
Repressive dictatorships do not require consent of the governed. They leverage their monopoly on violence and control. Quite literally, the first item on their agenda while forming is to disarm their populace.
This way, non-consensual governance is easier. No people demanding rights and freedoms, backed up by their ability to impose their will through force of arms. Put another way, they would be able to challenge the monopoly on violence that the (repressive) government holds.
Curiously, this is why the US bill of rights, is so important in guaranteeing freedom. The consent is given, up until the government decides to try to take rights away. Then consent is withdrawn.
government is violence (either actual or a credible threat of it). Application of violence doesn't require consent of the subjects of violence when the violence applying side is many orders of magnitude stronger than the subject.
From Sourcewatch: "Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is an Israeli propaganda organization that selectively translates materials from the Arab/Muslim/Iranian press purportedly demonstrating hostility against Israel/Jews."
https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Middle_East_Media_Rese...
When it comes down to it, it seems the complaint is that the people Sourcewatch quotes don't like MEMRI's alleged politics, and therefore we should ignore all evidence. IMHO, an ideological echo chamber is bad for the mind.
"The fact is that you gave evidence to Congress claiming that Gallup had found "a large majority of the Arab world" who believed the September 11 attacks "were the work of the United States government itself and/or a Jewish conspiracy". What you said is untrue, and Gallup has confirmed that. I trust you will now apologise to Congress for your false testimony. Finally, in the light of your most recent remarks about me personally, I will make clear now that your nationality and religion do not bother me in the slightest. What does concern me is your political agenda, and the deceitful way you go about promoting it."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jan/28/israel2
Regarding the 'ideological echo chamber,' I fully concur. MEMRI's board has included such characters as Elliot Abrams, Donald Rumsfeld, and John Bolton, so the discriminating reader should take that into consideration as well.
On the other hand I also want to snark off by something something like "Hi, Eliza!"
So I guess I'll ask: was this a serious comment? (I genuinely can't tell)
But I don't think that really means anything as to the post they were replying to when someone talks about the level of paranoia some folks have.
I see these kind of posts where someone mentions something and you get these sort of "look one time(s) this thing actually happened" info bit gets posted with no elaboration. I'm not at all sure what that is supposed to mean. Support for the idea that "every journalist is a spy and if they aren't they should be"?
If the intent is to justify that paranoia / those actions I'm not really sure that makes sense / you could justify just about anything then.
edit: or maybe not, you could imagine someone who really doesn't like Jews and wants to send all of them to Israel.
As well as that, there's a phenomenon called Christian Zionism that's popular among conservative evangelicals, which views the establishment of the state of Israel and a number of related milestones as a fulfilment of Biblical eschatological prophecy. Their enthusiastic support for the relocation of the US embassy (and others) to Jerusalem is rooted in a belief that it signals the End of Days and forthcoming battle between good and evil on the field of Armageddon. While a minority position, it's one that's in ascendancy at the moment and counts the US Secretary of State (by conviction) and the President (by transaction) among its adherents.
In short, it's complicated. This is not to say that everyone who's anti-Zionist is good or has valid reasons, many such are indeed anti-Semitic, from casual to virulent. Neo-Nazis often leverage ambivalence or antipathy towards Israel to convert people to anti-Semitism and recruit them, a technique known as entryism. And there are anti-Semitic currents on the left too, particularly among dogmatic types who think Stalin did nothing wrong (sometimes loosely referred to as 'tankies').
Of course this isn't US specific.
Also, the only two people listed were Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton? All the powerful people in Washington that you could accuse of shadowy conspiracies to control the media, and they picked two women, and one of them is black (ooooh, I get it, the little girl in the TV show is cuban, so also a person of color?)? Considering the demographics of US politicians, yeah - that comes off a little prejudiced. But hey, maybe it's a huuuuge coincidence. /shrug.
Isn't that a bit hypocritical?
as for context, a good book on the subject is "manufacturing consent" by Noam Chomsky. In it he details how american media of all forms is used as a propaganda vehicle in order to shape and create the american public's politics.
The TV shows linked are just applications of that strategy.
also, you calling a foundational work in propaganda theory a meme book isnt exactly a sound counter argument, either. Here, educate yourself: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
You know, to criticize the Shah does not mean to praise the ayatollahs. Nor does to criticize the ayatollahs mean one has to praise the shah. His misrule and cruelties, no matter how nominal when compared in a fit of whataboutism, simply emboldened his enemies and led to revolution. In some ways, you can lay the atrocities of the successive regimes on his bloody follies.
What misrule? (Curious as to the lengths and depths of your studies of modern Iranian history.)
During the 50 years of Pahlavi dynasty, Iran went from being a basket case toy of England and Russia to a nation that was actually posing strategic problems for Western imperialists in the 70s (so he had to go).
It is not whataboutism to direct your gaze to the proverbial mirror. By what standard is this "brutality" of SAVAK measured?
Tell me: how many innocent civilians were killed during terrorist activity of leftist guerillas in the 70s in Iran? Do you have a clue?
When asked who was responsible, they said “America or Israel”[1]
So while MEMRI’s statement is not factually correct (it wasn’t Gallup and they didn’t ask the question of who did 9/11 to everyone), it’s not that far off base.
[1]https://newrepublic.com/article/94546/middle-east-radical-co...
I do agree that readers should take into account possible biases of their sources.
When I introduce Mr. X to an audience, I may choose a distinguishing characteristic.
To claim that the 'distinguishing' or 'characteristic', or 'essential character' of Shah of Iran was "tyranny" or "brutality" is egregious. Historical facts simply do not reflect that.
20 years ago, he was on “liberal” PBS all the time.
Everyone has been spamming "Manufacturing Consent" like crazy recently. Just telling people to read it doesn't support any argument, it's just an attempt to appear high-brow because Chomsky. You need to specify how Chomsky supports your argument.