The Cavalier Daily
Serving the University Community Since 1890

Lessons on freedom

"DEMOCRACY is a process,not a project." Mohammed Khatami, former president of Iran, spoke these words last Thursday in a speech at the National Cathedral. He meant that democracy was not something that could be achieved through repression of anti-democratic ideas but was the very means of dealing with such ideas. Earlier that day, Khatami had given an address at the University, where he was greeted with chalkings and flyers arguing that, in the name of democracy, the University should not have allowed him to speak. It is embarrassing that the leader of a nation with a less-than-perfect human rights record would have a firmer grasp on the meaning of democracy than students at the University founded by Thomas Jefferson. The arguments offered by those who opposed his visit are both irrational and hypocritical.

The most prevalent objection to Khatami's is his support for Hezbollah, a charge Khatami did not deny in his speech. When questioned about the relationship between Iran and Hezbollah, Khatami answered, "Iran loves Hezbollah." However, Khatami spoke against terrorism in his speech and has condemned Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda on numerous occasions. The problem here is in defining terrorism. Khatami's view of Hezbollah as a defense against Israeli aggression in Lebanon, rather than as a terrorist group, is neither an uncommon nor an unjustifiable position. Khatami's relationship with Hezbollah does not make him unworthy of an invitation.

The atrocities committed by the Iranian government while Khatami was president are also cited as a reason that Khatami should not have been welcome here. "Khatami represents a fear-based regime which has executed political dissidents and minorities, stoned women and violently suppressed peaceful student protests," says Michael Wain, who organized the protest. It is true that the government over which Khatami presided was oppressive and violent, and it is disappointing that Khatami was not asked to account for such a gap between his pro-democracy rhetoric and his government's poor human rights record. Since Khatami did not hold the most powerful position in Iran, it is difficult to hold him responsible for all of his government's actions. To create a parallel example, it would be laughable to blame President Bush for the continued legality of abortion in America, although it is a policy of his government. Like Bush, Khatami has repeatedly argued against the status quo, but lacked the power to change it significantly.

Moreover, it is impossible to find a government that is not responsible for any human rights violations. Our own president recently admitted that the CIA operates secret prisons where terror suspects are interrogated using torture -- excuse me, "alternative" -- methods, which may be in violation of international law. Khatami himself made the same point in his speech in Washington. Surely the president would be invited to speak at the University were he to go on a speaking tour after the end of his term. It may seem like such an argument makes excuses for Khatami -- and he certainly deserves criticism for his failure to accomplish many of the reforms he promised -- but disagreements with Khatami's policies, however passionate, do not make his visit an unprofitable one.

Dialogue with reform-minded individuals in the Middle East should be welcomed at this critical point in history. Khatami's speech dealt with the need for toned-down rhetoric between the United States and Iran and for "transforming the current dialectic among cultures and civilizations to that of dialogue." In other words, Khatami encouraged exactly the sort of communication between East and West that both the Ahmadinejad and Bush administrations have, in his view, stifled in exchange for threats of violence. He also criticized Ahmadinejad for halting Iran's progress towards democracy. It does not make sense for pro-democracy students to protest against a speech that was unambiguously pro-democracy.

Further, those who wish to encourage democracy in the Middle East should rally around a figure like Khatami. Shokoufeh Dianat, an Iranian student, said she remembers her parents voting for Khatami because he was "the most liberal choice they had." Even if Khatami is far from ideal, for many Iranians he represents the best hope for democracy. Such a figure should be supported by the United States, not dismissed as just another tyrant in a turban.

The hypocrisy present in the protests is most easily seen in the flyers handed out to those leaving Newcomb Theatre after the address. They pointed out that during Khatami's reign, pro-democracy students were not allowed the freedom of speech that Khatami was enjoying at the University. To argue that because Khatami's government did not allow free speech, and so we should not, either, is hypocritical. Democracy cannot be reached by silencing anyone who may have anti-democracy views, nor does tolerance of such views represent nihilism or moral ambivalence. What it represents is an unwavering commitment to the ideal of a free society.

Daniel Colbert's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at dcolbert@cavalierdaily.com.

Local Savings

Comments

Latest Video

Latest Podcast

With the Virginia Quarterly Review’s 100th Anniversary approaching Executive Director Allison Wright and Senior Editorial Intern Michael Newell-Dimoff, reflect on the magazine’s last hundred years, their own experiences with VQR and the celebration for the magazine’s 100th anniversary!