Main Page | Month Archive | Email Updates | RSS Feed | Print Version

UNIVERSITY DIPLOMACY — US : 0, IRAN : 1
OCT 21, 2007 - 3:15PM PDT
by Iskra Kirova

Ever since his rise to power in 2005 Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has enjoyed being in the spotlight of American attention. Not without the help of the news media and the White House's preoccupation with his persona, the Iranian President successfully managed to turn many of his public appearances into public diplomacy triumphs. His musings on the Holocaust and the annihilation of Israel, and his defiance of the West over Iran's nuclear program have been the subject of much debate granting him rock-star-like popularity on a par with Bruce Springsteen. While nothing more than the demagoguery of an unpopular leader, these same narratives were the word of the day once more during Ahmadinejad's recent visit to the U.S. for the opening session of the United Nations General Assembly. Incessant rumblings and great anticipation preceded Ahmadinejad's arrival, reaching a crescendo when Columbia University enlisted him as a speaker at its World Leaders Forum. Intended to meet "bad beliefs" with "better beliefs" and "hateful words" with "wiser words," Columbia provided a prominent public diplomacy platform in the battle of ideas. Yet, neither the soft power advantage nor the publicity opportunity was successfully clinched for American public diplomacy.

The centerpiece of Ahmadinejad's visit to New York—his appearance at the UN—was largely overshadowed by Columbia's invitation. Ahmadinejad's speech was sponsored by Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs, which is launching a year-long series of lectures and events on the thirty years history of the Islamic Republic of Iran. News outlets were poised eagerly to cover the controversy as some condemned and others applauded the invitation. Fierce debate erupted over whether Ahmadinejad's views deserved to be granted such a high podium and opinions were expounded on free speech, Iran and American democracy. Coverage of the Iranian President was predominantly negative and even those who supported his right to speak in New York expressed their condemnation of the President's views and Iran's human rights violations. However, Ahmadinejad still managed to pull off an extraordinary publicity coup. Despite the fact that Manhattan teemed with world leaders and important gatherings, he remained the media's favorite celebrity. Aside from the Iraq war, Ahmadinejad's visit was the most closely followed news story during the week. According to the Pew Research Center, 23% of the public followed the story very closely, and 14% listed it as the single news story they followed most closely. Ahmadinejad's visit, and U.S.-Iranian relations in general, was the most heavily covered news story of the week. Fully 13% of the national newshole was devoted to this story. In an earlier poll, gauging news interest, Ahmadinejad ranked fifth in the list of people most often mentioned by American news outlets, preceded by O. J. Simpson, George Bush, Britney Spears and Hillary Clinton, and followed by General Petraeus.

As Americans were watching, so were the Iranians. The entirety of Ahmadinejad's Columbia talk was broadcast on Iranian television the next day providing an unparalleled opportunity for American public diplomacy to communicate its message. Some argued that having Ahmadinejad speak would demonstrate clearly the fundamental pillars of American democracy — free speech and the right to protest. The example of how the United States handles criticism and how it treats even the most opposing views was expected to highlight its moral high ground over the regime in Tehran. The contrasts would hopefully not be lost on the Iranian people. President Bollinger stated that inviting Ahmadinejad to speak showcased America at its best: "to commit oneself to a life—and a civil society—prepared to examine critically all ideas arises from a deep faith in the myriad benefits of a long-term process of meeting bad beliefs with better beliefs and hateful words with wiser words. That faith in freedom has always been and remains today our nation's most potent weapon against repressive regimes everywhere in the world". Dean John Coatsworth added that, "opportunities to hear, challenge, and learn from controversial speakers of different views are central to the education and training of students for citizenship in a shrinking and still dangerous world."

Not only was this seen as an excellent occasion for a real world demonstration of American values and democratic practices at work, it could also be perceived as a valuable opportunity to directly confront the Iranian President on his controversial remarks and hold him accountable for the accusations that the U.S. has been leveling against him and his country. Iran has been accused by President Bush of seeking nuclear weapons and was named the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism. As opposed to the straight speech which Ahmadinejad was scheduled to deliver at the UN, a "robust" debate could serve to lay bare the bankruptcy of human rights in Iran and challenge the rationale of its policies in Iraq and the wider Middle East.

Yet, Columbia was not praised for this laudable public diplomacy endeavor. Democratic Presidential candidates expressed at best a lukewarm support for the University with Senators Clinton and Obama noting that they wouldn't have invited Ahmadinejad if they were Columbia's President. John Edwards cautioned against allowing leaders like Ahmadinejad to score propaganda points. However, it is not so much Columbia's invitation, as the current administration's personalization of Iranian politics through Ahmadinejad's figure and the news media's subsequent focus on the President that continues to enhance his popularity both at home and abroad. Nevertheless, Republican Presidential candidates went even further in criticizing the University. Senator Thompson stated he would not have allowed Ahmadinejad into the country if he were President. California Rep. Duncan Hunter went as far as to threaten that "if President Bollinger follows through with this hosting of the leader of Iran, I will move in Congress to cut off every single type of federal funding to Columbia University." So much for the hope of showcasing American freedom and democracy.

As events unfolded on the day of Ahmadinejad's talk, those who looked to Columbia for an exhibition of the country's openness to dialogue and receptivity to criticism, might have been disheartened. In welcoming his guest, President Bollinger called him a "petty and cruel dictator" and "either brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated." Whether the result of threats of sanctions, political or media pressure, or simply a miscalculation, Bollinger's "tough line" with the Iranian President caused an uproar in the U.S. and abroad. Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, described Bollinger’s speech as culturally insensitive and counterproductive. "If you invite someone, you have to be polite," he said. "Ahmadinejad scored points, especially in their culture. If you permit an enemy to come into your home, you still treat him with dignity and respect. Therefore, we lost."

Most importantly, President Bollinger's disrespectful attitude towards an elected head-of-state alienated and shocked Iranians who perceived it as an offense to their nation. The chancellors of seven Iranian universities issued a letter to Bollinger saying his "insult, in a scholarly atmosphere, to the president of a country with a population of 72 million and a recorded history of 7,000 years of civilization and culture is deeply shameful." In response, Iranian academics asked ten questions of President Bollinger pointing out America's 1953 overthrow of Iran's national government, U.S. support for Saddam Hussein during the 1980-88 Iraq-Iran war, and U.S. support for undemocratic regimes in the Middle East. As evidenced by this response, the episode at Columbia exacerbated Iranian feelings of humiliation and frustration with the West. It contradicted the very goals of public diplomacy which views academic leadership as a primary stakeholder and gatekeeper in relaying political and cultural texts to the broader public sphere, a strategy President Ahmadinejad is well versed in.

While the Iranian President ingeniously complements each of his UN visits with hosting a carefully targeted stylish dinner with American journalists and academics, the Bush administration is quick to dismiss invitations by Iranian Universities such as the one extended on October 1 by Ferdowsi University, one of Iran's oldest academic institutions located in Iran's second largest city of Mashhad. The justifications presented—Iran's undemocratic society, nuclear ambitions and threats against Israel, make such a visit all the more imperative. Before leaving for New York Ahmadinejad stated that "the American people in the past years have been denied correct and clear information about global developments and are eager to hear different opinions." Arguably, Iranians have fared much worse in terms of access to information. However, as Ahmadinejad strives to provide "a different voice" and the "correct and clear information" to Americans, Iranians have not been engaged in a similar exchange of opinions. Rather, President Bush's rejection of Ferdowsi University's invitation compounded the hostile welcome and mistreatment accorded to Ahmadinejad at Columbia, fueling Iranian perceptions of the U.S. as an arrogant superpower. Some commentators drew comparisons between U.S. policies toward the "Evil Empire" of the Soviet Union and Iran of the "Axis of Evil." Despite the deep antagonism, American presidents did not ignore or insult their Soviet counterparts. Today, dialogue has been scrapped and to many Iranians it seems that U.S. policies are increasingly advanced through bullying while Americans "act like cowboys and nothing more."

As a result, events at Columbia and the developments they triggered helped rather than hurt Ahmadinejad's standing in Iran and the broader Middle East. Just as his failed economic policies and provocative posturing over the nuclear program were drawing intense criticism among Iranians, this hostile reception came to justify his defiance and intransigence and confirmed Iranian officials' claims of an unjust attitude toward Iran in America. It further provided Ahmadinejad with an opportunity to posit himself as the true public diplomat who "created a new room for making direct contacts with the U.S. and international public opinions" only to be snubbed by his uncooperative hosts. For Iranian critics and supporters alike he appeared to have taken the high road. "Our president appeared as a gentleman. He remained polite against those who could not remain polite," said Ahmad Masoudi, a customer at a grocery store who had watched state television's recorded version of the event. The demonizing and mistreatment of the Iranian President enhanced his image of resistance to the U.S. in the eyes of much of the Middle East, an image that he endeavors to encourage among Iran's Arab neighbors. According to Ahmad Bakhshayesh, a professor of politics in Tehran's Allameh University, "the protests by Israel's supporters against Ahmadinejad outside the university also helped him to appear as a hero for people of the Middle East."

Ironically, Iran and the broader Middle East rather than Western publics are Ahmadinejad's target public diplomacy audience and many of his statements are framed for domestic and regional consumption, although delivered in an international context. Some have described his strategy as a charm offensive in gearing up for the upcoming presidential elections. Others have pointed to his attempt to garner popular support in the Middle East by using the pan-Arab appeal of the Palestinian question.

U.S. demonizing of the Iranian president, however, does more than boost his domestic and regional popularity. It also bolsters his persona which does not enjoy a place of real power in Iran. Often depicted as George Bush's prime antagonist, Ahmadinejad has become the definitive cultural stereotype of a powerful and radical Islamic leader with his finger on the nuclear button. The abundant coverage that he regularly receives is likely to lead publics in the U.S. to form their opinion of Iran and Iranian policy largely based upon their evaluation of the President. However, greater attention to the actual power nexus of Iranian politics might redefine Americans' perceived threat from Tehran, as the President's quirky personality and combative populism are hardly a serious concern for foreign policy. Although a master of inflammatory rhetoric, President Ahmadinejad does not wield much power or influence and does not have decision making authority over the nuclear briefcase or Iran's military. Basing U.S. policy and attitudes toward Iran on the President's rhetoric thus increases the risk of exaggerated threat assessments much to the detriment of conflict resolution with Iran.

Ultimately, events around Ahmadinejad's visit served to increase rather than alleviate tension between the U.S. and Iran and multiple public diplomacy opportunities were wasted. Considering the amount of media attention showered on the visit, such a platform could have been used to raise ideas and propositions on an unofficial level that would have undoubtedly reached the mass audiences in the Middle East and generated a certain amount of goodwill. On the contrary, the attempt to deny Ahmadinejad a public diplomacy coup only contributed to his popularity at home and in the broader Middle East, while the disrespectful treatment he received further alienated Iranian public opinion and played into the hands of critics of American policy. Thus, the opportunities provided by Columbia's public diplomacy forum were squandered.


The following is an aggregation of articles, commentary and public opinion polls on the public diplomacy implications of Ahmadinejad's visit to the U.S. and their significance in the broader U.S.-Iranian relations.


NEWS ARTICLES AND EDITORIALS

United States

US, Iran Play with Fire
(Ramesh Thakur, Boston Globe, October 4, 2007)
The recent in-your-face introduction by Columbia University president Lee Bollinger of Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may have delighted the US audience, but it has compounded America’s image problem in the rest of the world.

Iran college asks Bush to speak
(BBC News , October 2, 2007)
An Iranian university has invited US leader George W Bush to speak following his Iranian counterpart's hostile reception at a US college last week. "We're not taking it too seriously," said a White House spokeswoman. She said Mr Bush might have considered the invitation if Iran allowed freedom of expression, did not have nuclear ambitions, and did not threaten Israel.

Blogging Ahmadinejad in Tehran
(New York Times , September 30, 2007)
Despite official harassment and intimidation, Iranian blogs remain a vibrant source of debate and provide a valuable insight into popular opinion inside the country. Bloggers tend to be young, well educated and not very supportive of President Ahmadinejad, who typically attracts followers from the urban poor.

The Bollinger/Ahmadinejad farce
(Rosa Brooks, LA Times , September 28, 2007)
Ahmadinejad was playing to global public opinion, and though he lost some PR points for incoherence and general bizarreness of message ("In Iran, we don't have homosexuals"), he gained some for coming off as a bit more mature than his prissy, infantile host. Bollinger, meanwhile, was playing to a different audience. After taking a beating for giving Ahmadinejad a forum, he was eager to show the media, alumni, concerned Jewish organizations and a raft of bellicose neoconservative pundits that he was no terrorist-loving appeaser of Holocaust deniers. In a narrow sense, both Ahmadinejad and Bollinger achieved their goals. Ahmadinejad showed that he could be dignified in the face of crass American bullies, which will play well abroad -- and may even buttress his dwindling prestige in Iran. And Bollinger showed that he can be a crass American bully, which, in our current political climate, is what passes for "courage."

U.S. response plays right into Ahmadinejad's hand
(Mohamad Bazzi, Newsday.com, September 28, 2007)
Arabs admire Ahmadinejad because they believe he is brave enough to stand up to the United States and Israel, he is mindful of his people's interests, and he is in touch with the common man. In whispers, Arabs talk of how the Iranian leader is different from Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah, who are dependent on American support to stay in power. After his speech this week at Columbia University, Ahmadinejad's stock in the Arab street is sure to rise even higher.

Dreaming of a Dictator: The Perils of Personalization in the Iran Crisis
(Todd Fine, Center for Defense Information, September 28, 2007)
No Hitler, Ahmadinejad is a sagging populist politician using the nuclear crisis to bolster his personal popularity and power within a baroquely complex political system. The Western personalization of Iranian politics through his figure has a deleterious effect on U.S. policy and, via the media, on the actual circumstances in Iran.

The Ahmadinejad show
(LA Times, September 27, 2007)
As the ruckus recedes, the question remains: How much does Ahmadinejad matter? The answer depends on just one thing: To what extent are his views shared by the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who really calls the shots in Iran? Ahmadinejad is reported to enjoy the supreme leader's full support. Certainly Khamenei is as rhetorically anti-American and mistrustful of Western intentions as his protege. Yet some see signs -- in Iran's dealings with the International Atomic Energy Agency and in the recent release of four Iranian Americans held in Tehran, among other moves -- that the quiet Khamenei may be less eager than the flamboyant Ahmadinejad to provoke a confrontation with the West.

Columbia Still Reeling Over Visit
(Karen Arenson, New York Times , September 26, 2007)
Before Iran's president took the stage at Columbia University on Monday, the university's president, Lee C. Bollinger, sent out an early-morning e-mail message, calling on students and faculty "to live up to the best of Columbia's traditions." Yesterday, many critics questioned whether Mr. Bollinger had met that test himself. Some said Mr. Bollinger's remarks were just the rebuke that Mr. Ahmadinejad deserved. Others said they were embarrassing and offensive. And there were still questions about whether Mr. Ahmadinejad should have been afforded a public platform at a prestigious university.

'Fruitbat' at Bat
(Maureen Dowd, New York Times , September 26, 2007)
We just can't stop being nice to Iran. We help build up the self-serving doofus Iranian president, a frontman with a Ph.D. in traffic management, into the sort of larger-than-life demon that the real powers in Iran — the mullahs — can love. New York's hot blast of nastiness, jingoism and xenophobia toward its guest, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, only served to pump him up for his domestic audience. Once you've made the decision to invite a tyrannical leader, you can't undo it by belittling him in public. Wouldn't sticks and carrots — cultural fluency, smart psychology and Reaganesque dialogue — be a better way to bring the Iranians around than sticks and stones?

Inflating a Little Man
(Joe Klein, TIME , September 26, 2007)
Ahmadinejad's appearance was a small but telling moment in the rolling overhyped crisis that is George W. Bush's so-called war on terrorism. The Iranian President's words had no practical, only symbolic, global import. He has very little real power in Iran, none over foreign policy or the nuclear program. And yet this strange little man who brings to mind Peter Sellers more readily than Adolf Hitler — Sellers playing one of his brilliantly befogged simpletons — occasioned a classic, free-range American outrage festival, in which everyone, even Hillary Clinton, happily granted him exactly the opprobrium he desired.

My Dinner with Ahmadinejad
(Richard Stengel, TIME , September 26, 2007)
This is now an annual ritual for the President of Iran. Every year, during the U.N. General Assembly in New York, he plots out a media campaign that — in its shrewdness, relentlessness, and quest for attention — would rival Angelina Jolie on a movie junket. And like any international figure, Mr. Ahmadinejad hones his performance for multiple audiences: in this case, the journalists and academics who can filter his speech and ideas for a wider American audience.

The Iran Impasse
(Washington Post , September 26, 2007)
The furor that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has created in New York this week has served his repugnant purposes in a couple of ways. First, like other anti-American demagogues, he has managed to use a visit to the U.N. General Assembly to convey an image of himself as engaged in mano-a-mano ideological combat with the U.S. enemy. Even more important, the Iranian president, who is not his country's principal leader, has managed to distract attention from a question more urgent than his rhetoric about the Holocaust and Israel.

Mr. Ahmadinejad Speaks
(Karen Arenson, New York Times, September 26, 2007)
There are many reasons we find Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's policies and pronouncements loathsome. High on that list are his denial of the Holocaust, his call to wipe Israel off the map and his country's sponsorship of terrorism. Equally loathsome is Iran's denial of basic civil rights to its citizens, including the right of free speech. So we are dismayed by the behavior of some of New York's democratically elected representatives who denounced and threatened Columbia University for inviting the Iranian leader to speak there yesterday. We can imagine no better way to give hope to opponents of Iran's repressive state than by showcasing America's democracy and commitment to free speech.

Iran's Media Assail President's Treatment
(Nazila Fathi, New York Times , September 26, 2007)
Iranian state television on Tuesday sharply criticized the way President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had been treated during his Columbia University talk and asserted that he had triumphed over his adversarial hosts, whom it described as Zionist Jews. Mohsen Rezai, a former head of the Revolutionary Guards, denounced on the state-run news channel the inhospitable treatment of Mr. Ahmadinejad. "He is the president of a country," he said. "It is shocking that a country that claims to be civilized treats him that way."

U.S. loses home-field advantage in its jousts with Ahmadinejad
(Eric Trager, The Philadelphia Inquirer , September 25, 2007)
Give Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad credit: He understands the American public far better than our leaders understand the Islamic publics to which he is appealing. In attempting to reach out to American students, Ahmadinejad has done what American diplomats have failed to do on campuses throughout the Middle East. For American public diplomacy, the results have been disastrous, as these campuses—always catalysts for the political movements shaping the region—have become unchecked hotbeds of anti-American sentiment. With each small victory in public diplomacy, Ahmadinejad's stature grows throughout the Middle East.

Ahmadinejad v. Bollinger: Words Were Spoken, But What Was Said?
(Ru S. Freeman, CommonDreams, September 25, 2007)
An invitation is a communication, expressed both formally and politely, to an individual, asking that they attend a festivity or event of ones own creation. In this case, Columbia University's president, Lee C. Bollinger, chose to ask a visiting foreign dignitary to grace his campus with his presence. A guest who accepts such an invitation does not envision that they will be publicly humiliated and attacked by their host for the amusement of other attendees. How embarrassing then that such a thing could occur, at so prestigious a venue as Columbia University, so publicly and at the center of such media attention. How much worse, however, is that not one newspaper in this country chose to point out that Lee C. Bollinger acted appallingly and disgracefully?

Ahmadinejad Does New York
(Pierre Tristam, CommonDreams, September 25, 2007)
Even assuming that Ahmadinejad was the enemy, that's only more reason to speak with him face to face, not less, or at least to hear him out. The guy had the guts to submit to open questions from a hostile university and New York audience. When's the last time George W. Bush had that courage? Bush never goes within a mile of an audience that hasn't been filtered, interrogated, pre-screened and pre-judged.

Iranians decry Columbia leader's harsh speech
Bollinger said Ahmadinejad behaves like a 'petty and cruel dictator'
(MSNBC, September 25, 2007)
Iranians expressed dismay Tuesday at the tough reception given to their president in New York, saying his host was rude and only fueled the image of the United States as a bully. In the eyes of many Iranian critics and supporters alike, Ahmadinejad looked like the victim. He complained about Bollinger's "insults" and "unfriendly treatment" but kept a measured tone throughout the discussion. Some critics of Ahmadinejad in Iran warn that U.S. demonizing of the Iranian president has only strengthened his hand and boosted his falling political fortunes. Ahmadinejad, they say, keeps influence through his image as standing up to the world's superpower.

Who's Afraid of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?
After all the trembling, the Iranian president got a bruising instead of a boost.
(Jesse Walker, Reasononline, September 25, 2007)
When Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia University yesterday, he did not emerge with the "propaganda victory" that neocon pundit Bill Kristol assured us he would receive. Sadly, however, Iran's president did win a propaganda victory throughout much of the world outside the USA.

Propaganda Coup
(Alan W. Dowd, FrontPageMagazine, September 25, 2007)
It has been a very successful trip for Ahmadinejad. And by that measure, it's hard to see how giving him a platform was the right thing to do.

Our view on Ahmadinejad in New York: Let Iranian president speak — to showcase U.S. values
(USA Today, September 24, 2007)
The Columbia invitation represents an opportunity of another, more important sort. The public display of Ahmadinejad getting to taste two fundamental pillars of democracy — free speech and the right to protest — should speak volumes about what the United States stands for, and what he and Iran don't. The contrast with how the United States treats critics hopefully won't be lost on the Iranian people.

Ahmadinejad in America
(Washington Post, September 24, 2007)
It is difficult to see how the United States would benefit from having a "dialogue" with a jihadist despot who denies the Holocaust and is arming to the teeth.

N.Y. site transcends boundaries
(James Carroll, Boston Globe, September 24, 2007)
Today's rebuff to the current president is of a piece with a long history of omni-political denigration aimed at Tehran. After all, it was when the reform-minded Khatami was Iran's leader that George W. Bush, in 2002, hung that nation on the "Axis of Evil." The extremist Ahmadinejad rode to power on Iranian reactions to the steady insult from America. This new insult reinforces him at home, just as moderate, relatively pro-Western opposition forces are jelling there.

Candidates Speak Out On Ahmadinejad Visit
(CBS News, September 24, 2007)
On the day that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visited Columbia University in New York, U.S. presidential candidates offered reaction ranging from support for academic freedom to harsh criticism of the university for inviting the Iranian president to speak.

Candidate (Duncan Hunter) Threatens Federal Money Over Ahmadinejad Columbia Speech
(Byron Wolf, ABC News, 24 September, 2007)
Duncan Hunter, the Congressman from California, joined other Republican Presidential candidates over the weekend in condemning the upcoming address to Columbia University by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. But Hunter went a step further by pledging that if the speech goes forth he will introduce legislation in Congress to cut off federal assistance from the University.

Legislatures May Act on Columbia
(Jacob Gershman, The Sun, September 24, 2007)
As the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, prepares to address Columbia University today amid a storm of student protest, state and city lawmakers say they are considering withholding public funds from the school to protest its decision to invite the leader to campus. "Obviously, there's some degree of capital support that has been provided to Columbia in the past. These are things people might take a different view of … knowing that this is that kind of an institution."

U.S. Focus on Ahmadinejad Puzzles Iranians
(Michael Slackman, New York Times, September 24, 2007)
In demonizing Mr. Ahmadinejad, the West has served him well, elevating his status at home and in the region at a time when he is increasingly isolated politically because of his go-it-alone style and ineffective economic policies, according to Iranian politicians, officials and political experts. Unlike in the United States, in Iran the president is not the head of state nor the commander in chief. That status is held by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader, whose role combines civil and religious authority. At the moment, this president's power comes from two sources, they say: the unqualified support of the supreme leader, and the international condemnation he manages to generate when he speaks up.

Turning Ahmadinejad into public enemy No. 1
(Juan Cole, Salon, September 24, 2007)
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit to New York to address the United Nations General Assembly has become a media circus. But the controversy does not stem from the reasons usually cited. Demonizing the Iranian president and making his visit to New York seem controversial are all part of the neoconservative push for yet another war.

Facing Scorn, President of Iran Is Defiant to His Critics
(Helene Cooper, New York Times, September 24, 2007)
Mr. Ahmadinejad's much talked-about appearance at Columbia came as the opening act of a week of dramatic theater here as the United Nations General Assembly opened its annual session. Online tickets had evaporated in 90 minutes last week, they said, almost on par with a Bruce Sprinsteen concert. "I'm proud of my university today," said Stina Reksten, a 28-year old graduate student from Norway. "I don't want to confuse the very dire human rights situation in Iran with the issue here, which is freedom of speech. This is about academic freedom."

Ahmadinejad hailed in Middle East
(Jeffrey Fleishman, LA Times September 24, 2007)
The president of Iran, who has made a point of defying the West and Israel, has won admiration even among Sunni nations.
(Subscription required)

Backstage at the Ahmadinejad Show
(Michael Hirsh, Newsweek, September 24, 2007)
What's really driving the Iranian president's Western charm offensive? A savvy political strategy for Ahmadinejad—and despite what the White House says, Iran is the closest thing to a democracy in the Middle East outside Israel—is to appear just as reasonable with the West as Rafsanjani.

Columbia Does the Right Thing with Ahmadinejad
(Brian Lehrer, New York Public Radio, September 22, 2007)
New Yorkers are choosing up sides over Columbia University's plan to hold a forum on Monday with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. WNYC's Brian Lehrer says in his opinion, Columbia is doing the right thing. The world will see a free society at work, where demagogues get exposed. The United States stands to look strong, not weak, by showing the world our values: seeking truth and accountability based on FREEDOM of speech, not denial of speech. Denial, as we know, is Ahmadinejad's claim to fame.

President Bollinger's Statement About President Ahmadinejad's Scheduled Appearance
(Columbia News, September 19, 2007)
Columbia, as a community dedicated to learning and scholarship, is committed to confronting ideas—to understand the world as it is and as it might be. To fulfill this mission we must respect and defend the rights of our schools, our deans and our faculty to create programming for academic purposes. Necessarily, on occasion this will bring us into contact with beliefs many, most or even all of us will find offensive and even odious. We trust our community, including our students, to be fully capable of dealing with these occasions, through the powers of dialogue and reason.


Iran

Ahmadinejad: Bush Strategy Will Fail
(Iran Daily, October 8, 2007)
Pointing out that Iran is known as a cultural nation, he said, "We are duty-bound to promote constructive sciences in universities and among human beings." Ahmadinejad advised all academics to continue scientific cooperation with all scientific centers around the globe, except those affiliated with the Zionist Israeli regime. He also said that the Columbia University scenario was carefully designed to tarnish the image of the Iranian nation. "The Columbia scenario followed certain objectives, the most important of which was to quell the voice of the Iranian nation," he said. President Ahmadinejad addressed the Columbia University on September 24 during his visit to New York to attend the 62nd session of the United Nations General Assembly.

Wisdom Demands Vigilance
(Iran Daily, October 7, 2007)
Addressing a group of university chancellors and professors in Tehran on Saturday, Ahmadinejad called for positive global interactions to develop Iran, IRNA reported. "Our universities should adopt a global standpoint regarding scientific and cultural affairs," he said. "Weak personalities are not appropriate to undertake such a task and, fortunately, we do not have such people in our universities. Given our culture and scientific background, the world has nothing to offer and this was quite evident from what happened at Columbia University." On his presence at Columbia University, the president said, "I intended to break the heavy propaganda of the Western society which does not let any new idea enter and we saw that they were empty-handed." "They wanted to hit us from an academic front, what they had not been able to achieve in the political front. They wanted to condemn us in the name of university and launched a heavy psychological warfare but with the help of Almighty God, the whole thing turned against them," he said. Ahmadinejad said the universities will enjoy free Internet lines soon.

Elham hails President Ahmadinejad's speech at Columbia University
(IRNA, October 1, 2007)
Government spokesman, Gholam-Hossein Elham assessed as "positive and successful" the last week's speech by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at Columbia University in New York. Speaking to IRNA, Elham said by delivering the controversial speech at the Columbia University, the president "created a new room for making direct contacts with the US and international public opinions." "The president's visit to the US was a good chance to cast light on the realities about Iran's Islamic system," Elham said.

Majlis Speaker: No Cause For Enemy Jubilation
(Iran Daily, September 30, 2007)
Lawmaker Mohammad Qomi slammed the rude behavior of the Columbia University Chancellor Lee Bollinger toward Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, noting that such a treatment indicated that the US preferred insult to Dialogue Among Civilizations. Qomi, who represents Pakdasht in Majlis, stressed that a university should be the cradle of freedom, civilization and knowledge, but the American academic's behavior showed to the world that the US slogans of democracy and freedom are all lies.

World Heard Iran's Voice at Columbia
(Iran Daily, September 30, 2007)
Presenting a report to the cabinet meeting on Sunday, the president added that his visit to New York was successful and the enemy's attempts to sabotage the meeting in Columbia University failed, IRNA reported. "They attempted to isolate Iran by sabotaging the process of the meeting in Columbia University, but thanks to God, they got negative results," he said. President Ahmadinejad said that those who were present in the meeting and observed the entire program got the sense that Iranian officials were honest.
(Scroll down for article)

Ahmadinejad says American tour displayed Iran's grandeur
(IRNA, September 29, 2007)
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said here Friday evening that displaying Iran's grandeur was the greatest achievement of his tour to the American continent. As to the Columbia University president's insult to the Iranian president, he said the incident revealed both Iran's innocence and the hostility of the enemies of the Iranian nation. Although everything had been prepared for holding a mock trial to damage the image of the Iranian nation, the righteousness of the Iranian stands was proved to the world nations.

President Scored Against Enemies
(Iran Daily, September 28, 2007)
Addressing worshipers at the Tehran University premises, Tehran's Interim Friday Prayer Leader Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati reflected on Ahmadinejad's presence in the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday and said the president scored another victory against Iran's enemies during his interaction at the world body and Columbia University, IRNA reported. He praised the president's performance and termed him the "shining star" at this year's UN General Assembly meeting. "The issue is not Ahmadinejad and Iran, but the whole Islamic world. So, naturally he is not a source of pride only for Iran but Muslims worldwide," added Jannati, who doubles as secretary of the powerful Council of Guardians.

200 Lawmakers Hail President's Speech
(Iran Daily, September 26, 2007)
Lawmakers in a statement on Wednesday hailed President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for defending the stances of the Islamic Republic of Iran by delivering an eloquent speech in the New York-based Columbia University. "How the president behaved in Columbia University and reacted toward the insulting remarks of the president of Columbia University was an example of Islamic and revolutionary behavior," the lawmakers said. They also said that the manner in which Columbia University president, Lee Bollinger, insulted President Ahmadinejad and the manner in which the US media highlighted his statements shows that the arrogant powers do not want a better relationship and dialogue to be established among nations.

Iranian University Chancellors Ask Bollinger 10 Questions
(Fars News Agency, September 25, 2007)
Seven chancellors and presidents of Iranian universities and research centers, in a letter addressed to their counterpart in the US Colombia University, denounced Lee Bollinger's insulting words against the Iranian nation and president and invited him to provide responses for 10 questions of the Iranian academicians and intellectuals. "Your comments, filled with hate and disgust, may well have been influenced by extreme pressure from the media, but it is regrettable that media policy-makers can determine the stance a university president adopts in his speech. Your remarks about our country included unsubstantiated accusations that were the product of guesswork as well as media propaganda. Some of your claims result from misunderstandings that can be clarified through dialogue and further research."

MP Blasts Columbia University Chancellor
(Iran Daily, September 25, 2007)
MP Abdolmajid Shoja said on Tuesday the offensive behavior of Columbia University Chancellor Lee Bollinger toward President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad betrayed the US administration's weakness in facing Iran. Shoja also told IRNA that all nations worldwide respect their guests, but Bollinger insulted the high-ranking Iranian official in a country which claims to be the cradle of democracy, culture and civilization. "They could have expressed their criticisms and views in the form of questions," he said, adding that the US academic could have spoken to Ahmadinejad more politely.

IRI President addresses students at Colombia University
(IRNA, September 25, 2007)
Despite entire US media objections, negative propagation and hue and cry in recent days over IRI President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's scheduled address at Colombia University, he gave his lecture and answered students questions here on Monday afternoon. The audience on repeated occasion applauded Ahmadinejad when he touched on international crises. At the end of his address President Ahmadinejad answered the students' questions on such issues as Israel, Palestine, Iran's nuclear program, the status of women in Iran and a number of other matters.

Ahmadinejad Heads for UN
Americans Will Hear A Different Voice
(Iran Daily, September 24, 2007)
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the American people are eager to hear diverse views from across the world and he looks forward to provide them with "correct and clear information." "The United States is a big and important country with a population of 300 million. Due to certain reasons, the American people in the past years have been denied correct and clear information about global developments and are eager to hear different opinions," he said.


The Middle East

Iran university invites Bush
(Khaleej Times, October 2, 2007)
"President Bush is invited to give a speech and respond to numerous questions, must notably about human rights, terrorism and the Holocaust," said university president Alireza Afshour, according to the government daily Iran. "This is what President Ahmadinejad did, despite the lack of respect shown towards him," he added.

US dismisses Iranian invitation to Bush
(Khaleej Times, October 2, 2007)
The White House scoffed on Tuesday at an Iranian university's invitation to US President George W. Bush to address its campus, saying he was "not taking it too seriously." "If Iran was a free and democratic society that allowed its people freedom of expression, and wasn't pursuing nuclear weapons, and wasn't advocating to destroy the country of Israel, the president might consider that invitation," said spokeswoman Dana Perino.

Similarities Between Bush and Ahmadinejad
(Jamil Theyabi, Dar Al-Hayat, October 2, 2007)
What is notable is Ahmadinejad's retreat in statements made in New York that conflicts with what he was stating from the podiums of Tehran against the US and Tel Aviv. He sought to appear a benign diplomat waving the flag of peace and harmony and giving the impression that his "belligerent" remarks against Washington and Tel Aviv were "amputated" and "fabricated". The Iranian president sought to break the ice inside the Columbia University lecture hall, and make the angry audience laugh, so he said, "I think the politicians who are after atomic bombs or are testing them, making them -- politically they are backward, retarded." Even though he said it in jest, Ahmadinejad's statement was a political signal for peace.

The Region: Ahmadinejad's agenda
(Barry Rubin, Jerusalem Post, September 30, 2007)
Ahmadinejad is not a unique phenomenon in modern Middle East history. The role to be filled is that of the leader of the Arabs and Muslims as well as prime enemy of America, Israel and the West. In this respect, he is comparable to Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser in the 1950s and 1960s; Iran's Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the 1970s and 1980s; Iraqi president Saddam Hussein in the 1980s and 1990s; and Osama bin Laden during the period before and especially after September 11, 2001.

Dialogue with the deaf
(Aijaz Zaka Syed, Khaleej Times, September 29, 2007)
Ahmadinejad's passage to America only goes to show the impossible gulf that exists between the Muslim world and the West, especially United States. Given the lethal mix of ignorance, prejudice and plain hostility that exists in the US and much of the West vis-à-vis Islam and Muslim world, even the mere thought of bridging this divide is daunting. How many Muslim leaders and heads of state have tried to engage the West in a meaningful dialogue? Which is why one must commend Ahmadinejad's courage and persistence. This is his third visit to the US in the past two years. And every time he has tried to reach out to the other side.

Words, not war with Iran
(Ida Sawyer, Al-Ahram, September 27, 2007)
"While Bollinger raised some interesting points that should have been addressed, he did so in a confrontational and unprofessional manner," said Laura Jones, a student at Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA), which hosted the event. "He used language that was inappropriate both for the forum and for use with a head of state, and students were embarrassed." In contrast to the US government's hardline stance, many Americans -- frustrated and often infuriated by the Iraq debacle -- are increasingly concerned about the dangerous potential of a military confrontation between the US and Iran. They believe efforts such as Columbia's World Leaders Forum that promote dialogue, debate, and public diplomacy may be crucial for easing tensions between the two nations which have not had formal diplomatic ties since students stormed the US Embassy in Tehran in 1979.

Jewish community in Iran slams US protest against Ahmadinejad's visit
Heads of Iran's Jewish community 'outraged by the disrespect' shown to the Iranian president during Columbia visit
(Dudi Cohen, Ynetnews, September 26, 2007)
The Jewish community in Iran published a statement Wednesday, slamming the disrespect shown to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by human rights and freedom activists on his recent visit to the United States. "The constant disrespect and disturbance demonstrated (during Ahmadinejad's speech at Colombia) prove once more that those claiming to be peace loving people have no real grasp of the concept," said the statement. Published by the Iranian news agency IRNA, the statement also said that the Jewish community in Iran was "outraged by that kind of behavior."

Ahmedinejad, the winner in the battle of nerves at Columbia University
(Khabrein.info, September 25, 2007)
It was an occasion that should have been reserved to judge the man whom world knows as rabble rouser, dictator. Who as per the world media backs terrorism like no other head of the state. But unfortunately opposite was on display when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came to address a forum at Columbia University at the invitation of Columbia president Lee Bollinger.
A president of a leading university of the US who had invited Ahmadinejad himself called the guest "petty and cruel dictator." If it was not enough he went on to say "When you come to a place like this it makes you simply ridiculous". The man who heads one of the best universities in the greatest democracy that promises freedom for one and all could not but call his guest provocative and uneducated.

Our World: Columbia's choice - and ours
(Caroline Glick, Jerusalem Post, September 24, 2007)
The problem with Columbia's action, the reason that there can be no moral justification for the university's decision, is because by inviting Ahmadinejad to campus, Columbia has made the pros and cons of genocide a legitimate subject for debate. By asking Ahmadinejad challenging questions, Bollinger has reduced the right of the Jewish people to live to a question of preferences.

Let Ahmadinejad speak
(Bradley Burston, Haaretz.com, September 23, 2007)
Let us look, instead, at what the Iranian president represents for us, the Jews who live in the state he has suggested he'd like to see erased. Let's face it. We need all the help we can get, on the diplomatic sphere as well as in the area of international understanding of our defense concerns. That's where our man in Tehran comes in. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is simply one of Israel's premier diplomatic and security assets. His expressed views make Israel look pragmatic, clear-eyed, non-paranoid.


THE BLOGOSPHERE

Deconstructing Ahmadinejad's Visit: When Public Diplomacy is NOT Public Diplomacy
(Eric Nisbet, Framing Conflict, October 1, 2007)
In this sense, was the goal of Ahmadinejad’s attempt to visit the World Trade Center Memorial, speech at Columbia University, and address to the UN General Assembly a form of public diplomacy aimed at the United States? In short, NO. What many in the U.S. failed to understand was that his audience was not the American public or politicians. Rather, his primary audience was his domestic base in Iran – demonstrating that he can move beyond his confrontational style and make some attempt to "reach out" to the Americans. A secondary audience is the greater Muslim world in general, and in this sense he was using his visit as a tool of public diplomacy to this secondary audience.

Why Ahmadinejad Is Smiling
(Truthdig, September 29, 2007)
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad definitely got the villain treatment during his recent US visit, but Mosaic asks whether it’s Americans he’s even talking to. After all, getting tough with Uncle Sam earns big points in the Middle East.

The Invention of an Anti-Christ
(TomPaine.common sense, September 28, 2007)
The 'wingers need an Antichrist, the Bushies need a pretext, and the Israelies need protection… All of this makes Ahmadenijad the Most Dangerous Man Alive, and someone whose country must be invaded at all costs.

Ahmadinejad and the city
(Shmuel Rosner, Rosner's Blog, Haaretz.com, September 26, 2007)
The president of Columbia University apparently believes that he evinced extraordinary courage - not only once, but twice. First, when he faced down his critics and, in the name of "freedom of academic discourse," hosted Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and a second time when he insulted his guest. "A petty and cruel dictator," he called him. Standing at the podium in his university, facing his faculty, protected by American police, Professor Lee Bollinger really is a big hero. However, both the invitation and the insult said more about the host than about the guest. What has become clear beyond all doubt this week, if there had been any doubt, is that Ahmadinejad, petty or not, cruel or not, is above all a world-class celebrity of the sort that a New York backdrop only flatters.

Propaganda Show at Columbia University
(Fern Sidman, Intellectual Conservative, September 26, 2007)
There is no doubt that Ahmadinejad's performance at Columbia was a political windfall of great magnitude for him. Completely cognizant of the controversy that swirled around him, the cunning politician relished in the fact that he exploited the momentum of his adversaries to further his own agenda. The 5,000 outraged demonstrators provided him with the number one news story of the day, as he used the global television coverage to score points with the Ayatollahs back home. Under enormous pressure from alumni and various and sundry other detractors, Columbia President Lee Bollinger (who was responsible for extending the invitation to the Iranian leader to speak at Columbia) introduced Ahmadinejad armed with a laundry list of accusations of human rights violations along with a perfunctory excoriation of his infamous remarks on Holocaust denial. He called him a "petty and cruel dictator" and referred to him as "astonishingly uneducated."

Media Coverage Helps Ahmadinejad, Harms US Public
(Danny Schechter, MediaChannel, September 26, 2007)
No language is off-limits, no ridicule out of bounds. This suits the the Iranian leader, who TIME has called "a dark genius at mobilizing Iranian public opinion." Now he is the victim of a rude College president and an even ruder press. Down in the polls at home, the US media coverage has played right into his hands with the effect of also keeping the US public ever more ignorant about the country we may bomb next.

Ahmadinejad at Columbia: The Real Scandal
(Strongdemocracy, September 25, 2007)
The real scandal at Columbia is not the Iranian President's speech but the politician's all too predictable calls for censorship. The real scandal is that we had to be reminded by the devious and mischievous Ahmadinajad himself that the "University is a center for freedom of speech" – as he told a bemused Charlie Rose.

Ahmadinejad: Why The Right Is Wrong
(Azadeh Ensha, The Huffington Post, September 23, 2007)
Once again, the American right is going about things all wrong. Ahmadinejad is their best tool. Rather than working to shut him down, they should sit back and let him speak. Here's why: Sound bites from Ahmadinejad's Columbia appearance will inevitably produce more "evidence" the administration and its hawks can use to push the need for this regime's elimination -- like his incendiary remarks at the Council on Foreign Relations last year. It is Ahmadinejad's words the administration consistently cites as supporting evidence for its cause. If Ahmadinejad wasn't afforded the opportunity to speak, and to offer up more inflammatory remarks, then the right would be without this easy ammunition in its ongoing campaign to invade Iran.

The Power of Propaganda
(Vidiotspeak, September 21, 2007)
Ahmadinejad wanted to lay a wreath at Ground Zero while he was here in New York but the powers that be said, "No. That's OUR propaganda tool, not yours.” (In so many words.)


PUBLIC OPINION POLLS

Ahmadinejad Visit Draws Large Audience
Burma Protests Barely Register with Public
(Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, October 4, 2007)
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit to the U.S. drew a large news audience last week. Aside from the Iraq war it was the most closely followed news story, with 23% of the public following the story very closely, and 14% listing it as the single news story they followed most closely. Ahmadinejad's visit, as well as broader issues relating to U.S.-Iranian relations, was the most heavily covered news story of the week. Fully 13% of the national newshole was devoted to this story.

News Interest Index Omnibus Survey
(Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, September 21-24, 2007)

1% View Holocaust as Myth, 1% See Iran & US as Allies
(Rasmussen Reports, September 28, 2007)
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made a much-hyped trip to New York this week and 34% of American voters followed the news stories covering the event Very Closely. Another 38% said they followed the coverage Somewhat Closely. But, only 1% of voters believe that Iran is an ally of the United States. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 51% view that nation as an enemy. Forty-two percent (42%) say it's somewhere in between while 6% are not sure.

Read Comments:

No comments for this entry.

Add a Comment:

Your Name:
Your Email:
Comment:
Please enter the word you see in the image below:

NOTE: Your comment may not post immediately.