After we discussed the "Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi Arabian Diplomat" in my Middle Eastern Communities class, I looked for a youtube link to see what the popular media was saying about the incident and how the public was responding.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7GD_6_JpKE
While the video itself did not bring up any new information that was not discussed in class, the comments below the video showed how individuals are interpreting the situation. Many people responded angrily and accused the U.S. of being "the pot calling the kettle black." Other people commented that the plot may have been made up because the U.S. needs war to pay off the previous war. It is not explicitly clear but based upon the comments it seems that Americans and non-Americans both believe the same thing in this situation. The United States is often seen as a "secondary enemy" in the fact that the U.S. is the symbol of secular government and international power. The U.S. has its hand in a lot of foreign matters and many people around the world wish that to change. Some of the comments became a little hostile and I think this speaks to the importance of how countries are viewed and what connotations are given to each country or group of people. Iranians may check "white" on the census, and some Iranians attempt to become "whiter" to assimilate into American culture, but the question is, Should they need to?
Relations with Iranians have not been great in recent history so the answer differs depending on who you ask. But isn't that like most of the questions and answers when race or ethnicity is involved? There isn't one answer or understanding. Rather there is a loose framework in which people are supposed to fit or sometimes, the framework is expanded to include more people. Identity should not change between public and private spheres. America was founded as an immigrant nation, and sometimes it doesn't feel like Americans are accommodating to current immigrants
I think you are right that there is a lot of controversy surrounding America's intervention around the world. The other day in my American Foreign Policy class we were discussing the effects of American intervention in Iraq, Libya, Egypt, and other Middle Eastern and African countries. Even in this political science course, it was pointed out that, although the cause of our intervention was diplomatic/interest based, it seemed that each of these controversies developed into a religiously based struggle. Whether it became Islam v. Western religion or an internal split between religious factions, it seemed that US intervention sparked a heightened feeling of religious animosity.
ReplyDeleteYes the U.S. has sparked heightened feelings, but you're not getting the whole picture, TF. One of the real causes behind it is globalization in general. The rise of technology has connected so many people than ever before. The U.S. involvement in the Middle East in the past decade was the outcome of a rapidly globalizing world. Living in times when cultures are colliding, some adapt, and some try to protect traditional values. Rather than saying the U.S. is responsible for heightened feelings of religious animosity, which is not entirely false, it is globalization which is the impetus. I took the same class as you last year too.
ReplyDeleteBut yes Halvorson, the Saudi-Iranian conflict stems out of the Sunni-Shi'a divide. It also has to deal with the changing power dnamics in the region. With the two main Sunni challengers (and chief competitors) out of commission - Egypt and Iraq - Iran has some room to engage in risky behavior (also, the political leadership in Iran is in very deep water). Saudi Arabia has tried to fill the void which Iraq and Egypt left, in order to provide a check for Iran in the region. This very risky and potentially devastating move by Iran ether shows how unstable and desperate they are, or how willing they are to provoke a Saudi attack. Interesting stuff which will be closely watched.
also def correct about the immigrant part at the end. The U.S. needs a reformed immigration policy for a quicker legalization process which will hopefully encourage people to gain citizenship the legal way.
ReplyDeleteWe must be the nation that everyone wants to come to, rather than some laws by states which just adds to the problem. Let people embrace their identity.
This post makes me think a lot about what our professor said in class a few weeks ago; to countries that do not have a democratic government, it seems plausible that we Americans approve of our politicians and support all of their decisions. I, however, don't think this could be much farther from the truth. Voting today seems to be choosing the lesser of two evils. As a result, I'm not totally surprised by the viciousness of the comments on that youtube clip.
ReplyDelete