President of Iran Visits U.S.: The Controversies that Follow

The President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad(pictured below), arrived in the United States over the weekend, scheduled to attend the United Nations General Assembly, and also to speak at an open forum at Columbia University. In his speech on Sunday, Ahmadinejad addressed issues regarding Iran’s war policies, allegations of supplying weapons of mass destruction (WMD) to Iraq, and the overall treatment of the citizens of Iran. The arrival of Ahmadinejad in the U.S. caused many controversies centered on the Iranian President’s reputation of being a “cruel dictator” and advocate of war. His speech was well thought out but seemed like a form of propaganda to get the American public and the U.N. to view Iran less negatively. In an interview, the president of Iran emphasized Iran’s “peaceful nature”. Whether or not this attempt at gaining a more positive global image will help Iran’s standing in the U.N. is still to be determined.

In this author’s blog called "Iranian President at Columbia University", she carefully dissected each of the controversies the media has focused on regarding Ahmadinejad and voiced some alternative views about his comments. I found many of her arguments to be similar to my own beliefs, such as this one, “I think it is important for promoting peace in the world for all sides to put aside biases and attempt to understand each other”. Furthering opportunities, (i.e. through public forums) to educate one another is essential to developing understanding. However, it does seem like the President of Iran may not have been revealing the whole truth and using his appearances in the media to make Iran look more “neutral” than they may really be, given his more violent history. It seems like the perfect opportunity to “better his image” right before he goes to speak in front of the U.N. General Assembly.
Also, in response to the comment “there is Iranian aid to insurgents, but it might be through nongovernmental groups or through paramilitary groups with governmental connections.” This statement may be true; however, Ahmadinejad never specifically denied that his government did not supply WMD’s to Iraq, nor did he mention doing anything to stop these non-governmental groups from aiding Iraq. This seems like it should be a concern for Iran’s safety as well as the U.S.

In another author’s blog titled "American Inhospitality", I aimed to address some of the questions he posed about the speech. The authors commented on a few of the major topics involved in the controversy, such as “was an this really an open forum for thought and discussion, when the tone and the introduction was setup in such a way that creates an atmosphere of unwelcome and inhospitality?” To this, I respond by saying that the American media has negatively portrayed Iran for many years; thus, some feeling of being “unwelcome” had to have been expected. Although, I do agree that the reaction to the Iranian president’s arrival into the U.S. was rather harsh. Pictured, defending himself in an interview to the left. Perhaps, if Ahmadinejad had answered some of the questions more directly, the hostility shown towards him may have decreased. Ahmadinejad stated that he wanted to have the opportunity to provide the American people with “correct and clear” information. To me, it seemed like many of his responses could have been a kind of propaganda to help Iran’s image rather than ideas to discuss.