Premium
This is an archive article published on May 12, 2006

‘People around the world are flocking to God. Don’t you want to join them?’

Last week, Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad sent a letter to US President George W Bush. It was the first personal communication from an Iranian president to his US counterpart since the 1979 Islamic revolution. We reproduce extracts from the letter:

.

Last week, Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad sent a letter to US President George W Bush. It was the first personal communication from an Iranian president to his US counterpart since the 1979 Islamic revolution. We reproduce extracts from the letter:

For some time now I have been thinking, how one can justify the undeniable contradictions that exist in the international arena which are being constantly debated, especially in political forums and among university students. These have prompted me to discuss some of the contradictions and questions in the hopes that it might bring about an opportunity to redress them.

Can one be a follower of Jesus Christ, feel obliged to respect human rights, present liberalism as a civilization model, announce one’s opposition to the proliferation of nuclear weapons and WMDs, make “War and Terror” his slogan, and finally, work towards the establishment of a unified international community, but at the same time, have countries attacked; the lives, reputations and possessions of people destroyed and, on the slight chance of the presence of a few criminals in a village city, or convoy, for example, the entire village, city or convoy set ablaze.

Story continues below this ad

Or because of the possibility of the existence of WMDs in one country, it is occupied, around 100,000 people killed, its water sources, agriculture and industry destroyed, close to 180,000 foreign troops put on the ground, the sanctity of private homes of citizens broken, and the country pushed back perhaps 50 years.

At what price? Hundreds of billions of dollars spent from the treasury of one country and certain other countries and tens of thousands of young men and women — as occupation troops — put in harm’s way, their hands stained with the blood of others, subjected to so much psychological pressure that everyday some commit suicide and those returning home grapple with all sorts of aliments; while some are killed and their bodies handed to their families.

Later it was revealed that no WMDs existed to begin with.

Of course Saddam was a murderous dictator. But the war was not waged to topple him, the announced goal of the war was to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction. He was toppled along the way towards another goal, nevertheless the people of the region are happy about it. I point out that throughout the many years of the imposed war on Iran Saddam was supported by the West.

Story continues below this ad

It is not my intention to pose too many questions but I need to refer to other points as well. Why is it that any technological and scientific achievement reached in the Middle East regions is translated into and portrayed as a threat to the Zionist regime? Is not scientific R&D one of the basic rights of nations?

You are familiar with history. Aside from the Middle Ages, in what other point in history has scientific and technical progress been a crime? Can the possibility of scientific achievements being utilised for military purposes be reason enough to oppose science and technology altogether? If such a supposition is true, then all scientific disciplines, including physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, engineering, etc. must be opposed.

Lies were told in the Iraqi matter. What was the result? I have no doubt that telling lies is reprehensible in any culture, and you do not like to be lied to.

These are some of the grievances of the people around the world, in our region and in your country. But my main contention is:

Story continues below this ad

Those in power have specific time in office, and do not rule indefinitely, but their names will be recorded in history and will be constantly judged in the immediate and distant futures. The people will scrutinize our presidencies.

Did we manage to bring peace, security and prosperity for the people or insecurity and unemployment?

Did we intend to establish justice, or did we just support special interest groups and, by forcing many people to live in poverty and hardship, make a few people rich and powerful — thus trading the approval of the people and the Almighty with theirs?

Did we defend the rights of the underprivileged or ignore them?

Story continues below this ad

Did we defend the rights of all people around the world or impose wars on them, interfere illegally in their affairs, establish hellish prisons and incarcerate some of them?

Did we bring to the world peace and security or raise the spectre of intimidation and threats?

Did we tell the truth to our nation and others around the world or present an inverted version of it?

Were we on the side of people or of the occupiers and oppressors?

Story continues below this ad

Did our administration set out to promote rational behaviour, logic, ethics, peace, fulfilling obligations, justice, service to the people, prosperity, progress and respect for human dignity or the force of guns, intimidation, insecurity, disregard for the people, delaying the progress and excellence of other nations, and trample on people’s rights?

And finally, they will judge us on whether we remained true to our oath of office — to serve the people, which is our main task, and the traditions of the prophets — or not?

Are you pleased with the current condition of the world? Do you think present policies can continue?

If billions of dollars spent on security, military campaigns and troop movement were instead spent on investment and assistance for poor countries, promotion of health, combating different diseases, education and improvement of mental and physical fitness, assistance to the victims of natural disasters, creation of employment opportunities and production, development projects and poverty alleviation, establishment of peace, mediation between disputing states and distinguishing the flames of racial, ethnic and other conflicts were would the world be today?

Story continues below this ad

Would not your government and people be justifiably proud? Would not your administration’s political and economic standing have been stronger? And I am most sorry to say, would there have been an ever increasing global hatred of the American governments?

The people are disgusted with increasing corruption. The people of many countries are angry about the attacks on their cultural foundations and the disintegration of families. They are equally dismayed with the fading of care and compassion. The people of the world have no faith in international organisations, because their rights are not advocated by these organisations.

Liberalism and Western style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity. Today these two concepts have failed. Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the liberal democratic systems.

We increasingly see that people around the world are flocking towards a main focal point — the Almighty God. Undoubtedly through faith in God and the teachings of the prophets, the people will conquer their problems. My question for you is: “Do you not want to join them?”

Story continues below this ad

Mr President, Whether we like it or not, the world is gravitating towards faith in the Almighty and justice and the will of God will prevail over all things.

Mahmood Ahmadi-Najad

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement