Whistling Dixie in Tehran

After spending some time studying recent  events in Iran and Syria I’m left feeling like I have very little to offer the conversation. These are issues of incredible complexity. It would be irresponsible to try to explain – much less critique – the historical, geographical, ethnic, theological, and political factors influencing America’s foreign policy towards these states. Instead, I want to say a word about naivete and the mistaken tendency of some Christians to avoid confrontation with evil.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is an evil man. The president of Iran leads a regime that persecutes Christians and tortures women. He questions whether  the Holocaust occurred, and asks even if it did, so what? In a speech before the United Nations, Ahmadinejad claimed the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 were orchestrated by the U.S. government as a means to revive our economy while saving the “Zionist regime” (Israel). In an interview with George Stephanopolous, he said he believes Osama Bin Laden is living in Washington, D.C. thanks to the help of his friend George W. Bush. Ahmadinejad has repeatedly described his ambitions to exterminate Jews from Israel. In 2009, the Iranian people elected a new president, only to have their will denied. Protestors were met by the armed Islamic Revolutionary Guard and put down with violent authority.

In 2010, I attended the Association of Christians in Student Development (ACSD) annual conference held at Messiah College in Pennsylvania. One of the keynote speakers that year was David W. Shenk, a mennonite scholar and author of numerous books on Christian-Muslim dialogue. Shenk shared with us his experiences in this arena, highlighting a recent trip to Iran. He was invited to offer a paper at a conference and had been given the opportunity to speak to president Ahmadinejad, who was in attendance. Shenk used the opportunity to apologize – yes, apologize – to the president for president Bush’s failure to engage him in dialogue.

David Shenk, and those who share his pacifism, naively believe that men like Ahmadinejad can be reasoned with. They believe that if only Bush or Obama reciprocated the civility of Iran’s political leaders all this stuff about democracy, religious freedom, women’s rights, Israel’s right to existence, and the threat of nuclear war could be resolved over beers (err, tea) in the Rose Garden. 

The willingness not to see what one does not want to see is a dangerous game. In the 1930s, Dietrich Bonhoeffer exhorted his fellow Christians to open their eyes to the threat of Hitler. They refused to see what they did not want to believe. Later, after millions of Jews, Gypsies, disabled persons, and dissidents were slaugtered, some regretted their ambivalence.

Earlier today I received a copy of “Letters from a Birmingham Jail” courtesy of Trinity Forum. In it, Martin Luther King asks his fellow pastors to get involved in the fight for racial justice in America. His was a non-violent effort, but a movement that went far beyond mere dialogue. King called for and organized acts of civil disobedience and protest. He and his allies suffered for it. I believe they would have found much in common with the “Green Revolution” in Iran.

I don’t know what the United States or our allies should do to confront Iran. I don’t want the best way forward in Syria (or Pakistan, Russia, France, or Canada for that matter). What is clear is the necessity to be shrewd in our assessment of political leaders and their plans. Hoping for the best is not a strategy. Blithely disregarding warning signs of evil and instability will only lead to suffering and death. The United States is a leader with unparalled influence. Our burden is to stand for what is good and combat what is evil, one way or another.