Iranians: inherently suspicious? (cc photo: Mãhi Teshneh)
With nuclear talks underway again, there’s more discussions of Iran–unfortunately, in some cases.
In a New York Times story (11/15/13) about a new report about nuclear inspections–which found “evidence that the Iranians have put the brakes on their nuclear expansion”–readers were treated this discussion of Iranian motives:
The lack of certainty about Iran’s motives lends itself to widely conflicting interpretations of the report’s findings.
“They’ve got enough facilities, enough centrifuges, to develop and to complete the fissile material which is at the core of an atomic bomb,” Mr. Netanyahu said Thursday.
On Capitol Hill, aides to Republican and Democratic senators dismissed the report. “It simply confirms the concerns that senators already have: There have been no centrifuges removed,” said one. Another added, “They’re closing it down in the morning and opening it up in the afternoon.”
So the experts on what Iran is really up to are Netanyahu–who has been warning for two decades that Iran was just about to build a bomb–and two unnamed Senate aides. Good to know.
But the idea that Iranians are inherently more suspicious is widespread. Time magazine’s Karl Vick wrote a piece for the Time website (11/19/13) about a new YouTube video featuring Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif talking about Iran’s right to enrich uranium.
The video is “entertaining,” with a “winsome piano solo”–and Zarif’s “solemn style is Persian to the core.”
So what’s the problem? To Vick, he doesn’t spell out that he’s talking about uranium enrichment. And that refusal to state the obvious is also, I guess, “Persian to the core”:
Iranians are masters of what has been termed “Oriental indirection“—which amounts to not quite saying what you mean, but getting your point across in a range of subtle ways.
Now that struck some people as downright offensive:
This didn’t sit well with Vick, who explained that Oriental misdirection wasn’t offensive at all. His proof? He’d written about this Iranian tendency once before (9/20/13). In that piece, he explained that Iran’s political culture can be hard to understand–which is true enough. But it’s the explanation that is so puzzling, when Vick explains that this is so because the government’s messages are
wreathed in what’s been dubbed in the past as “Oriental indirection.” Translated–and anything coming out of Tehran must be translated–Oriental indirection means “listen to what I didn’t say” and “watch my eyes dance as I don’t say it.” It’s a bit like “you get my drift,” except the drift is never evident from a single conversation.
Now that’s not as offensive as, say, Richard Cohen’s “These Persians lie like a rug,” but it’s closer to the similarly bigoted notion that Iranians have special religious license to lie. Vick seems to wish Iran were more direct; sure, and I wish all political leaders everywhere were.
The problem is in making this seem like an exotic part of the Iranian character. Let’s offer a counter-example: Vick is Time‘s Jerusalem bureau chief. He must know that Israel possesses nuclear weapons–but Israel has made a habit of never disclosing this fact publicly. Would Vick come up with an ethnic or religious explanation for this peculiar political trait? I would hope not; but for Iran, the rules are evidently different.
In the supposedly evasive video, Zarif says, “Iranians are no different from any other people on this planet we share.” It seems like Karl Vick begs to differ.
You know, if you do a Google search for “Oriental indirection” (in quotes), you do get a lot of hits. They’re mostly from books published in 1914, 1912, 1908, 1909, 1922….
> Iranians are masters of what has been termed “Oriental indirection”
If that means BU-LL-IT – I’d heartily agree.
Most every culture has its duplicitous aspects, and I’m sure Iranian culture is no different.
Different cultures may express those shared characteristics in different ways.
So the prejudice doesn’t lie so much in ascribing a cultural component to political behavior
But in positing that somehow one culture is less honest than another due to some singular moral defect.
In this case, that accusation is served up from a very black pot indeed.
The description o “Oriental Misdirection” sounds an awful lot like a Republican trying to explain his unethical behavior.
Well, you know the Native Americans rightly told the invaders that you white guys speak with forked tongues. : ) Indirection is not unknown in many quarters.
Why does the NY Times always quote Mr. Netanyahu, because he has said the same thing about Iran for years?
All nations ( and all nations are composed of human beings) and like the resources of water, health care, shelter and food, ALL human beings have a right to exist, in spite of some really inane governments Why do so many politicians and reporters neglect this?
Open minds do not seem to find “indirections” in anyone.
Well, as masters of Occidental indirection, I suppose the U.S. knows misdirection when it sees it.
“Vick is Time’s Jerusalem bureau chief.”
That says it all right there.
I suggest, both Netanyahu and Karl Vick should read 2010 study by Professor Daniel Bar-Tal (Tel Aviv University) in which he claimed that Israeli Jews prefer to live in their ‘self-denial’ – as they don’t want to know the facts about their neighbours.
According to Jewish scholar, Dr. Sanford Drob, Torah forbids lying but both Talmud and Baba Metziah allow lying if that serve Jewish interests.
http://rehmat1.com/2010/05/24/study-israelis-prefer-to-live-in-self-denial/
Oriental indirection huh………..Think Obama ,Reed,Pelosi,Sebilious,and the rest of them have any of that in them?Yeah me too
Lee Atwater was a master of “Oriental misdirection” too.
Oriental Indirection: a concept brought to you by the British Empire which mastered Occidental Indirection as prescribed by Niccolò Machiavelli!
Attributing to Iran and Iranians a trait that its government is now clearly known all over the world for is the pinnacle of US media and punditry hypocrisy!
@Rehmet: I agree with most of the things you say about Zionists and Israel. But let’s not get carried away with Ahmadi-Nejad. He personifies a theocratic regime that forces its own brand of Shi’a Islam on its citizens and anyone who dares even question it languishes in barbaric jails if he is lucky and gets raped (females), tortured and executed if not lucky.
Also the man is so out of touch with 21st mainstream of human rights that he audaciously claims there are no gays in Iran! Perhaps he is right because they executed them all in the past 34 years! The Islamic Republic is anything but a republic. In a republic the vast majority of secular citizens can choose to not have a theocratic system of governance.
And don’t get me started on the theft of the treasury and the bastards driving around in bullet-proof late model limosines while their people still drive cars from 34 years ago.
Let’s not get carried away!