Separating the people from the president

24 January 2006

In today's Guardian George Monbiot explores the west's demostrated hypocrisy in relation to Iran's nuclear programme, quoting Paul Rogers's openDemocracy column. Monbiot states:

"Israel, citing the threat from Iran, insists on retaining its nuclear missiles. Threatened by them (and prompted, among other reasons, by his anti-semitism), the Iranian president says he wants to wipe Israel off the map, and appears to be developing a means to do so. Israel sees his response as vindicating its nuclear programme. It threatens an air strike, which grants retrospective validity to Ahmadinejad's designs. And so it goes on. Everyone turns out to be right in the end."

The comparison made on nuclear weaponry is relevant and timely but I scanned it for a consideration which, over the last few weeks, has become conspicuous to me in its absence. The element missing from Iran reportage is the domestic population and its reaction to Ahmadinejad's most controversial comments. This tends to give the impression that Iranians as a whole agree with, and support their president's stance.

This ommission is most troubling as it creates a negative impression of Iranians, necessary for western publics' endorsement of hostile action.

In fact a substantial body of opinion have been opposed to verbiage about wiping Israel off the map, and denying the holocaust. This in a country where free speech is censored and the Internet is filtered.

Iranian Federal Congress statement condemning Ahmadinejad's remarks

Iranian bloggers speak in code against Ahmadinejad

Review of 'We Are Iran' describing blogging against the regime



 "The character is praying: "Dear God, please silence Ahmadinejhad for a while"

From Another Irani Online

One last thing... I found this dissection of the anti-Zionist/holocaust denial combination by Oren Ben-Dor to be particularly clear-minded given the proliferation of emotions associated with that inappropriate juxtaposition. here


How can Americans fight dark money and disinformation?

Violence, corruption and cynicism threaten America's flagging democracy. Joe Biden has promised to revive it – but can his new administration stem the flow of online disinformation and shady political financing that has eroded the trust of many US voters?

Hear from leading global experts and commentators on what the new president and Congress must do to stem the flood of dark money and misinformation that is warping politics around the world.

Join us on Thursday 21 January, 5pm UK time/12pm EST.

Hear from:

Emily Bell Leonard Tow Professor of Journalism and director, Tow Center for Digital Journalism, Columbia Journalism School

Anoa Changa Journalist focusing on electoral justice, social movements and culture

Peter Geoghegan openDemocracy investigations editor and author of 'Democracy for Sale: Dark Money and Dirty Politics'

Josh Rudolph Fellow for Malign Finance at the Alliance for Securing Democracy

Chair: Mary Fitzgerald Editor-in-chief, openDemocracy 

Further speakers to be announced

Had enough of ‘alternative facts’? openDemocracy is different Join the conversation: get our weekly email


We encourage anyone to comment, please consult the oD commenting guidelines if you have any questions.
Audio available Bookmark Check Language Close Comments Download Facebook Link Email Newsletter Newsletter Play Print Share Twitter Youtube Search Instagram WhatsApp yourData