By Judith Gayle | Political Waves
All we are saying is give peace a chance
–John Lennon
Describing this week in figurative terms, let alone literal, is a challenge, but I think there’s a metaphor that will do: smack it on the backside and hold it up into the light, it’s arrived! Yes, I’m talking about the outlines of a nuclear deal with Iran, but I’m referencing a bigger delivery, as well, a larger birthing. Despite duplicitous legislators and ideological governors, despite desperate measures and terror for terror’s sake, despite unconscious behavior and the worst of fear mongering, we seem to have finally pushed past the last barriers of resistance to create that new thing we’ve been longing for: shift in consciousness.
Iran is in the foreground of the news today, and in order to understand what’s occurred, it’s important to discover who these people are. Too many of us think of Iran as the bookend to Iraq, a troublesome and zealous nation bent on destroying America that ‘compassionate conservative,’ George W., consigned to the Axis of Evil (along with Iraq and North Korea). That pronouncement came after decades of demonizing, the dot on the exclamation point of might-makes-right rejection from the western world, but — thankfully — it didn’t end there.
Does anyone remember the hush of shock, followed by cry of outrage and disbelief, when candidate Obama suggested that he would engage Iranian leadership in discussion with no ‘pre-conditions’? As unthinkable as wanting to take one of the Bush twins to the prom! It was considered a major stumble in his presidential aspirations, the musings of a naive, cloistered academic, unsuited for the rigors of leadership (and quite likely a shill for Islam, playing to the great unwashed diversity of American culture).
Now that the President has achieved the outline of agreement with the Iranians to curtail nuclear weaponization — a deal even the most cynical have called remarkable — what was whispered to be his Waterloo, to grab a quote from HuffPost Hill, has now become his Munich. Munich was the place, pre-WW II, where Britain’s Neville Chamberlain made a deal with the Germans, misreading Hitler’s ambitions and abandoning the Czech cause in a desire to avoid war.
Chamberlain is the name war hawks drag out to prove that cutting deals with bad guys only makes you a loser, so you can bet it’s being bandied about today as yet another major mistake and crime against Americanism as perpetrated by the (shill for Islam, unwashed diversity, yadda) black guy, along with his other accomplishments (as outlined here by unabashed liberal and Obama-admirer, Barbara Streisand.)
It can’t be over-emphasized how gloriously empty and misunderstood a moment this is on the right. Conservatives — who have used the Hitler analogy with no there, there for six-plus years — have found enough resonance with a pacifistic stumble in the past to scare the bejesus out of the faithful, although only the old farts and FOX News remember who Chamberlain was (review the paragraphs above if you are not an old fart).
But come — as we gaze at this slippery, new thing we’ve birthed — let us reason together. It’s been thirty-five years since the Iranian revolution and the ouster of American influence, its shift toward radical ideology and purity exacerbated by the fierce isolation of its shunning. Thirty-five years of sanctions and resentment, cold and hot wars with its neighbors, and demonization as a rogue state by much of the civilized world. That’s a long time to hold your head high and wait for a place at the table.
This is, after all, Persia we’re talking about. Its history as an empire is proud, its cultural contributions to art, literature, language and architecture impressive, its population young, multi-ethnic, urban and well-educated. It is not an Arab nation, and its practice of Shi’a Islam (less than 20% of the Muslim religion) makes it the stronghold for this branch of Islamic teaching. I think it’s easier to understand Iran, given its early dominance of the Middle East, as one whose history defines its nationalism. Even pushed to the edge of the herd, it is old, celebrated, and demands respect.
Iran has received very little respect since it ousted the American-backed Shah in 1979. Recreating itself within an ideological template didn’t help, putting theocracy before state and aligning with the hard-edged terrorist groups that had sprung up as Israel became more powerful. So if Iran seems a bit cranky on the world stage, that’s a no brainer. That “Death to America” is as common a salutation as “Have a nice day” shouldn’t come as a surprise to us, given the part we’ve played in reducing its power in the world, ridiculing its religion, insulting its governance, and providing uncompromising support to Israel, tolerating its undeclared nuclear capability, estimated at over 200 warheads.
Not that Iran is one of the good guys. When thinking of Iran, I keep a picture of Neda — the lovely young philosophy student cut down during Ahmadinejad protests in 2009 — close at hand. Her death, captured on video and posted on the web, not only galvanized the election protests but became a point of realization about what social media could do for political causes.
Iran is a military dictatorship governed by radicalized religion, and has no problem whatsoever removing offending citizens to dark holes of medieval torture and pain, or violating the civil rights of women, gays, or those intent on rocking the boat of their hard-line Islamic Republic. Not good guys at all, but insulated and embattled as they have been, how could they have grown into anything else?
Yet now, with the Internet making the world smaller, and an increasingly youthful population wanting to enter the 21st century, the Ayatollah seems amenable to a deal. It should be noted that for much of those thirty-five years Iran had been deemed a danger to the world, punctuated by decades of semi-hysterical warning that they were on the verge of producing nuclear bombs and obliterating the free world. Nothing was up but the rent. Reports that they’ve been two or three months from a bomb for the last dozen years or more are bunkum.
Even now, there is some question as to whether or not Iran really wants nuclear capability, although that seems — let’s be candid — reasonable enough when a nuclear-armed Israel is as dedicated to Iran’s collapse as Iran is to Israel’s. Me, I’ve always thought it was ridiculous to try to prevent Iran from obtaining what so many others had, especially in its own defense. Even now, with outlines of an agreement in place, it seems to me a second-best choice to trying for normalized relationships — although that will have to wait for stability in the region.
Historically, there remain only two ways to stop Iran’s nuclear possibilities: obliterate it or come to the table. For over three decades, the fear-base of the human ego and rampant nationalism erected unscalable barriers against the reasonable option, as a disapproving free world squinted over a great ideological chasm at a defiant Iran. This week, seems to me — against all odds and despite other less altruistic military policies — Obama earned his Peace Prize.
A word about John Kerry as first lieutenant in this enterprise: a man who would have been president if voting shenanigans in Ohio and voting irregularities elsewhere had been effectively challenged. I can think of no job so thankless as trying to herd the various factions of the Middle East into agreement on ANYthing, and, judging by his tireless enthusiasm and work ethic, no legislator is so underappreciated for his service to country.
As fellow veterans, Kerry and John McCain had a close friendship and working relationship years ago, which — sadly — I doubt exists today. McCain has joined John Boehner, who spoke this week from Israel, where he’s visiting with fellow uber-conservatives, echoing the Ted Cruz talking point that frightens children: the world is on fire. And although no one is going to argue that things are safer now than they’ve ever been, it’s more likely that the sensibilities of neocons and war hawks are threatened by smoke and flame, lacking the unquestioned support needed to keep America’s military might exceptional and the war machine oiled.
Foreign policy has moved the needle over the years, our modern version starting with Teddy Roosevelt’s “speak softly and carry a big stick.” Everybody focuses on the big stick portion of that ideology, especially since Teddy was a man’s man, a warrior, and yet it was the speak softly portion that indicates a level of non-aggression that was internationally trusted in a new century. We were just another fledgling nation.
Two wars later, we failed to heed Ike’s warning about the rise of the military-industrial complex — it was perhaps too little, too late — which created a multi-headed hydra that continues to grow in fits and starts. Yet even St. Ronnie the Reagan had limits as he dealt with the crumbling Communism of the 1980s. At this point, center-stage, everyone but the right-wing can see that Obama’s tendency to non-aggression has coupled with Ron’s no-nonsense “trust but verify” to provide new options in foreign affairs.
Will we be frightened out of the possibility of successful nuclear agreement with Iran by the chattering class? Every potential presidential candidate on the right (save a silent Rand Paul) has joined a bevy of old paradigm conservatives jonesing for the “bomb, bomb Iran” scenario. Can we get some perspective by remembering that most every military intervention the Republican Party proposed in the past decade was wrong, and still is?
Will we recall that George W. Bush will go down in history as the man who lit the Middle East on fire to recover non-existent WMD, bought favor with the nation’s treasure, tortured and conquered and broke faith with America’s values, and then stepped away to paint pictures of his feet in the shower? Will we remember that the war in Iraq didn’t pay for itself in the first months, and that they didn’t greet us with flowers in Baghdad? Will we take note of millions dead and nations decimated?
Then let’s agree that a fresh plan to deal with this worrisome issue of nuclear armament isn’t just welcome, but necessary. Let’s agree that the Iranians aren’t really interested in eating our children, and that their young citizens are at least as savvy as our own. Let’s assume that giving them an inch, in terms of sanction relief, is not the equivalent of a mile. Let’s realize that our ability to trust them is as much a leap of faith as is their ability to trust us.
Let’s celebrate a new path forward in a process that has not only been thirty-five years stalled, but unthinkable until now. And — pardon me! — the “don’t do anything stupid” policy of this administration (despite some failures in that regard) speaks to curtailing a level of hubris and military bullying that the majority of citizens, aware of troop exhaustion and our apparent inability to meet the needs of today’s returned vets, find welcome. Just knowing that military intervention is no longer our primary response in how the U.S. does business is a major step in soothing my heart.
Now both the U.S. and Iran have to sell this experiment in peace-making at home. Both face harsh criticism from their hard-line. Republican obstruction is already building walls against this process, and if you believe, as I do, that this is a moment when we must try with all our might to lift up civil discourse and attempt to solve our nuclear challenges, then contact your congress-persons and urge them to support this agreement. Few things have been so important to the peace of the planet and future possibilities of working together to restore balance. Go here to find your legislator.
So: sea change, evidence of a wave of attitude that has brought forth the birth of our new bouncing baby something or other, still blinking against the light and wondering what all that pushing was about. There are other signs — lots of them.
The name Mike Pence will go down in history as one of those governors who stepped on a land mine and saw his higher political ambitions self-destruct like exploding fireworks. Illinois joined a number of other states — mine included — in passing a Religious Freedom Restoration Act, effectively occulting gay rights, and was met with a shit-storm of pushback from not just the LGBT community, but states and businesses determined to boycott such outright bias. One nationwide enterprise responded to pleas from some of their employees by providing interstate transfers and moving allowances.
The Illinois tourist industry was immediately put on high alert, and a defiant Pence walked back his defense of the law. Four days later it was ‘fixed’ to provide guarantees of civil liberties to gay and other diversified citizens. A similar law was passed in Arkansas a day later, but reading the tea leaves, their governor threatened a veto. The bill was quickly amended to provide protections for all.
It should be mentioned that although there was immediate response from activists, it was the business class that got under the skin of state leadership and made it evident that such action would no longer be tolerated. Mind you, this was not a protracted exercise, dawdled over — this was news on Monday and rectified by mid-week.
Just as it’s taken years of pecking away at FDR’s laws and policies to create our nation as unresponsive to those without wealth or influence, you and I began pecking away at the policies that held us hostage to unethical governance over a decade ago. Some of us woke up early in the game, and some are just awakening from their apathy now, but it is our collective baby steps that have brought a change in how we think of these things.
We can find hints of progress all around us, when we’re aware that they’re there. Like an Easter egg hunt, these philosophical adjustments are not hard to spot when we know what we’re looking for. As I’ve spoken of before, animal abuse is in decline, with outrage plummeting Sea World revenue and prompting the end of elephants at Ringling Brothers. Ending animal cruelty — which some of the greatest minds of the 20th century considered the criterion upon which civilization must be judged — is not directed just toward big critters, either. Over 50,000 chickens were rescued, rehabilitated and placed in sustainable situations in California last month.
Change is everywhere. Wages for low-paying industry are being revamped, food production is being rethought, and climate has reached a level where it is no longer ignored. There is push for a new understanding of police procedures, Elizabeth Warren has awakened the youngsters to issues of financial exploitation, and immigration — while fought tooth and nail on the right — will find its proper place sooner, rather than later. These changes are inevitable.
And while the religious have (momentarily) received protection against having to provide means to those things that insult their religious principles, like birth control or abortion, others of us — like those against the death penalty for ethical reasons — have no voice whatsoever in the use of revenue to prosecute (often wrongly) and institute state-sanctioned murder. But bit by bit that is changing as well.
Here is a window into how these baby steps work. The American Pharmacists Association has joined the ranks of doctor, nurse and anesthesiologist associations asking its members to take a stand against providing drugs for execution. According to the board member who drafted the policy, which passed unopposed:
“Changing policy often takes two to three times through the process to bring everyone on board,” Fassett told The Huffington Post. “I was optimistic — cautiously so. But it was as close to a slam-dunk afterwards. Once we had a voice vote, it was clear that the majority of the delegates agreed with the policy.” […]
“Every major organization of health care providers who could potentially be asked by the state to join their execution team now have a uniform goal against this,” he said. […]
“When you’re out by the ocean and the tide finally starts to come in, you think, ‘Which of all those waves is the most important? The first wave that breaks? The last wave to roll in?’ I’m glad we added our little wave to the tide.”
The tipping point for the Pharmaceutical Association came when a group called SumOfUs partnered with “Amnesty International, the NAACP, the National Council of Churches, Reprieve and other groups. They sent a letter co-signed by 31 human rights organizations and religious denominations, to the pharmacists’ association, asking it to take a stand against pharmacists participating in executions.”
A non-profit with over 5 million members, SumOfUs.org describes itself as “a global movement of consumers, investors, and workers all around the world, standing together to hold corporations accountable for their actions and forge a new, sustainable and just path for our global economy. It’s not going to be fast or easy. But if enough of us come together, we can make a real difference.”
They — we — have proved it so. And each political issue we wrestle correlates to a personal one, a matter of insight and growth and willingness that shapes not just our outer world, but our inner world as well.
This new thing is our baby, asking us to see the world differently, to think outside the polarity box and value one another. We made it with the great yearning of our hearts, pushed forward by extraordinary astrological influences, fashioned in painful awareness and determination to overcome the downward spiral of democracy. It is pinned into our future, shaped by our changing consciousness, on days like today — marked by an eclipse that, as Eric mentioned, changes everything and sets what’s new into motion — accomplished by our baby steps in social consciousness and activism, and … yes … hope and change. It is designed from our belief in our selves, our love for one another and our beautiful planet, held in place by our highest aspirations.
Adding our little wave to the swelling tide, then — and with Resurrection Sunday close at hand, reminding us of the power of Love incarnate — let’s cradle this new thing, made from our expanding heart and bathed in the Light of a new paradigm, and pledge to begin again.