Check for web archive captures
Pilots Falling Asleep or Parts Falling Asleep
By lindamuralidharan on 2011-05-22 08:04:42
It seems every time I do some studying of Middle Eastern issues I find another author reminding me of what I know (and
have written about here), but what sometimes gets shoved into memory recesses from time to time.
I am reminded that when you don't depend on the usual media pundits and reporters and when you don't depend on the
typical American politician or the State Department, it is totally mystifying why we call Iran an enemy. The dictatorial
religious regime has reached out to the US for detente on more than one occasion. And illustrating one of the myriad ways
we have had opportunities to work on mutual goals, Iran was very active right after 9/11 in assisting the US in efforts to
destabilize the ruling Taliban of that era. The US has rebuffed them since then.
We are thus left with the usual suspects. Oil and Israel. And our own arrogance and typical ignorance of the realities of
regions where we seek to have influence abroad. Presumably we always want a "friendly" regime in any oil producing
country. Usually this means we are happy to support a dictator if she or he is pliable. We don't care how wretchedly corrupt
or brutal the Saudi ruling clique is so long as they guarrantee access to and our desired level of the pricing of oil. If there is
any hint that a country wishes to be more fair to its own people in negotiating profits or access, then this country is viewed
with suspicion. At some level we are not willing to concede that other countries like India or Russia have as many rights as
we do on the open market. We just don't want an open market.
I mention this because any country producing oil wants to sell it. In the appropriate trading environment, countries willing
to pay the price and be fair to the population that owns the oil will get the oil it needs. It just is not guaranteed to get more
than the next country over or at prices that are unfairly low or in agreements where Western oil companies draw out more of
the profits than is good for the host country.
So we don't trust Iran to be puppet like when it comes to oil distribution.
And then there is Israel. Even people in their own country have said the obsession with Iran is bad for Israel. And sure as
god made little green apples it's bad for us. And it is especially bad if we buy into it. Iran does not want to attack Israel.
Were it really to ever get a nuclear weapon it would be primarily for defense. If they were to get nuclear weapons it would
be simply tit for tat since Israel has them. And unfortunately the proliferation to date includes such other places as Pakistan
and India. Iran has a lot of nuclear armed neighbors. It is important to remember the "if", if Iran really wants a bomb it
would be for defensive purposes.
I'll concede the point that Iran may some day decide to arm a bomb. That is still no reason for the US to treat Iran as an
enemy. However, Israel wants us to and we seem to be as much the puppet of Israel as some dictators are the puppets of the
US. On the international scene it was very naughty of Israel, Pakistan, North Korea, India to go ahead with building nuclear
weapons. So....except for North Korea why are we still friends with these places?
The conclusion of those serious about realpolitik is that we start building a relationship with Iran that covers many of our
mutual concerns and that we prepare for tough negotiations some of which could involve oil, many of which would involve
keeping the shipping lanes safe for both sides in the Persian Gulf, and many of which would involve Sunni/Shia stability
throughout the region. Some kind of mutual or regional defense pact would reduce Iran's motivation for getting a bomb (if
they actually have that motivation).
I mention all this because it is mentally difficult to talk about a stupid tactic or strategy when the goal itself is
counterproductive. And the stupid strategy I have in mind is the endless build up of sanctions against Iran when it is pretty
clear that sanctions only hurt the people and don't budge the rulers and the goal of trying to guarrantee they never make a
nuclear bomb is a stupid goal. I mention all of this because the tactic of forbidding Iran to import repair parts for their aging
passenger fleet is stupid...not to mention inhumane.
Iran can't get new planes because of the sanctions in place. However, there has been a tradition of the US issuing waivers to
allow them to import replacement parts to keep their planes flying rather than crashing. Now people in Congress want to
forbid such waivers. (See HR 1655 introduced by Bran Sherman, D-Ca.) Really the planes need replacing as there is a very
bad safety record for the planes Iran flies. With some ability to replace parts, however, they can prevent a certain number of
tragedies and provide for some quality of life for Iranian citizens.
You can have a pretty good life in Iran if you are among the well off, pretty well educated, urban groups or if you are
content with a simple rural life and don't have 4 unemployed sons. Nonetheless life is very much a hassle with the various
restrictions regarding association with foreigners, regarding how women are supposed to dress, regarding customs (like
keeping a dog as a pet or choosing baby names that hark back to ancient Persian traditions and culture), regarding travel
restrictions and the like. Some additional economic hardships obtain that are related to international sanctions.
With all this, there are Iranians who would like to see their government reformed, and they tried to accomplish some of that
with the Green Revolution. It could not completely stand up to the oppressive government in power which derives its
legitimacy from 1) willingness to use force and torture against its own people 2) national pride (fear mongering by the
government telling the people that outside forces such as the US wish to harm and take over Iranian society) 3) continuing
belief on the part of many that after the horrors of the Shah, a convoluted religious hierarchy knows what is best for their
combined Persian/Islamic social and cultural and political needs. Remember it was the latter that enabled them to get rid of
the Shah's horrors which were totally supported by the US.
And it was the Shah who tortured, imprisoned, killed, and drove into exile the professional and leadership classes that might
have had a better chance of running a more enlightened society in any post-Shah government. The only places people were
left to gather and speak honestly were the mosques. Thus the cleverest of the clerics combined their religious zeal with
reform rhetoric and patriotic rhetoric (get rid of Western influence) and had a ready audience in their worship centers. Why
is the US prone to this kind of mistake? We certainly don't need to continue making them, do we?
Picture yourself a regular family with a modest but sufficient income raising a 3 year old son in Tehran. Your life has been
filled for some time now with concerns about onesies, picking out the right stroller, three year old birthday parties, etc. One
day the dad is sent by his company on temporary, six months assignment to a city a distance away and only reasonably
accessed by air from Tehran. The dad wants to fly home a couple of times during the six months to see his wife and son.
The wife wants to fly to visit the dad at least once so dad and son keep up their close relationship. Why should any member
of this family have to risk their lives to particiapate in something we here in the US take for granted?
We become very alarmed when air traffic controllers or pilots sleep (or play with their laptops). We think the safety of
affected flights is very much at risk and we raise a hue and cry. Why then not have the same concern for Iranian citizens
whose planes can be made a whole lot safer by replacement parts (Iran currently has a very bad airline safety record
because of its aging fleet)? We are here talking about people who may have voted for reform, who may have marched in the
Green Revolution, or may not. In any case, it has been pointed out by others that making civilians pawns in international
conflicts is neither helpful nor in tune with American values.
It's time to tell your member of the House to oppose this wretched bill and let the President issue his usual waiver for
imports that are strictly civilian and humane in nature.
