Avuncular American

The Marine Corps School of Body Language

Stop!; Hands up!; Drop your weapons!; Stop your vehicle; Show me your identification card...

Selected phrases to be taught US military personnel prior to deployment to Afghanistan, from "In The Loop," Al Kamen, in today's Washington Post

-------------

That last one - "Show me your I.D. card" - brings back memories of our Marine Security Guards at the American Consulate in Alexandria, Egypt.  The MSGs, our third line of defense after the Egyptian paramilitary guys with the Kalashnikovs and the local contract guards at the gate, manned the bulletproof glass-enclosed booth at the entrance to the Consulate proper.

Dressed in their white-hatted Marine best, they probably intimidated any poor Egyptian visa applicant who managed to get that far, if only because of their "Leatherneck" reputation.  But they were a very professional bunch of guys (this was before women MSGs appeared on the scene in the late 80s), and they did their best to learn some Arabic.  Including "Show me your I.D. card."  Result: blank stares.

Try as they might, the combination of American accent, inch-thick ballistic glass, and miles of cultural separation defeated their efforts at communication in the local vernacular.  Until they hit upon the hand over hand gesture, shown here.  Voilà!  Instant comprehension.  Oh, that I.D. card!

But here is the extra bit that the Marines learned, and taught me, who had pretty decent Arabic language skills back then: the hand over hand thing meant everything tangible, measurable.  Whatever you wanted it to mean, in context.  Want a French-style baguette loaf, and not the little round pita bread?  Right hand superimposed over left arm, up below the elbow - long.  Trying to describe a thimble-sized auto part to a mechanic?  Hand over opposite fingers - small.  And so on.  The ultimate universal gesticular mnemonic device - your hands.

General McChrystal's idea of hands-on language training before heading for Helmand makes sense, and I'd say that there are already lots of Marines and soldiers who have figured out that communication sometimes requires more than a few foreign words strung together.  Just be sure that what passes for a gesture of clarification in Egypt doesn't mean anything rude or hostile in Dari!

Eastern Exposure for New European Parliament

Europe is in Eurasia.

It wouldn’t be autumn in Brussels without its slew of conferences to welcome the city’s policy wonks back from a long European summer vacation. This week’s all-day conclave devoted to “The New European Parliament: What Priorities for Foreign Affairs, Security, and Defence?” covered a lot of ground, especially when the subtitle indicated that it would include Transatlantic relations, Russia, Iran, and Central Asia. Despite the perhaps over-ambitious agenda, a number of impressive speakers were packed into the schedule. Full disclosure: I chaired the workshop on “Iran and Central Asia,” obviously an expert now that I've been twice to Uzbekistan.

Chatham House rules prevent me from citing individual speakers, but suffice it to say that there were MEPs, EU Commission and Council representatives, as well as distinguished diplomats and academic experts. The only sparks that flew were intellectual, as the very florid Italian Professore Irnerio Seminatore, director of conference organizer IERI, shared his trademark passion for realpolitik, which he sees as an endangered species in need of protection in this city dedicated to multilateral and intergovernmental organizations. The event was co-sponsored by ISIS-Europe (organizer of this year’s excellent “NATO Shadow Summit“), and the Euro-Atlantic Association of Belgium (AEAB).

If I give short shrift to the workshop on Russia and the EU’s Eastern Partnership, it’s because I couldn’t be in two places at once. Read about the Eastern Partnership on the EU's official DG Relex page. It was also impossible to take advantage of Ambassador Pierre Morel’s dual-hatted expertise as EU Special Representative for Georgia (part of the Eastern Partnership) and EU Special Representative for Central Asia. Luckily for my panel, he put on his Central Asia hat.

Garnering as much knowledge as possible about sometimes-troubled lands to the East is in the interests of Europe and its Parliament. The audience was reminded of Europe’s energy dependence on Russia, but also its deep commercial ties that go beyond gas. The US-Russian talks on Iran, which were barely over when our conference started, were a reminder that Europe’s geo-strategic concerns are shared by the two nuclear giants.

We were reminded of Iran’s once central position in Western assumptions (mostly those of American Presidents) as “an island of stability” in the Middle East.  That same heyday of the Shah saw the birth of Iran’s nuclear program, which is so troubling to its neighbors and to the West.  But given Iran’s long history - Persia was a “world power” for centuries when “the world” was more strictly defined - and its strains of national pride and/or national victim hood, it won’t be easy to woo Tehran from what it considers its right to develop nuclear power (homework assignment: define "Power").

Central Asia’s inclusion in the debate illustrates what one expert called “the discovery of Central Asia” by Western policy makers. As Afghanistan’s and Iran’s immediate northern neighbors, they are affected by dangers of fundamentalism, of instability, and of war, and their voices need to be heard as we look at the wider region.

In all, not a bad way to kick off the conference season, and a reminder that things start in the East (image: sunrise over Eurasia by the talented Tibor Tóth).

This post first appeared in Euractiv's "Blogactiv," a compendium of European opinion.

Obama's Nobel Preventive Peace Prize

24 hours after Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said that Middle East peace is "impossible" and, especially helpfully in case that message appeared overly pessimistic, that many countries "have learned to live with" a permanent state of war, the Nobel Committee has awarded the 2009 Peace Prize to US President Barack Obama.

The President's personal honor can be shared with all those Americans who voted for him almost one year ago - they made the election of a potential peace maker possible.  I stress potential, for that is obviously what the Nobel Committee has in mind in designating a President who currently has not one but two wars on his hands:

For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman.

As a former diplomat who joined hundreds of my colleagues in campaigning for Obama last year, it is gratifying that the Nobel Committee cited him for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples."

The award can't have come at a more important juncture.  Not only must the US deal with a belligerent Israeli government personified by Avigdor Lieberman, but Obama must craft an Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran policy that may contain as many military "elements of national power" as diplomatic.  The Nobel people are aware of this more than most, and want to put their weight preemptively on the side of diplomatic solutions.

At the same time, since the President will probably have to give the 10 million Swedish kronor (about $1.4 million) to the US Treasury, the Nobel Foundation is doing its bit to help the parlous state of the deficit.  With the dollar falling by the day, those kronor might be even more valuable next week.

Seriously, the President brings great credit to an office that was seriously discredited by his predecessor, who practiced preventive war instead of waging peace.  My humble congratulations.

Now, to the job at hand.  Please, Mr. President, have a heart-to-heart talk with Mr. Lieberman and his boss Bibi, who once said that the 9/11 attack on the US was good for Israel.  Talk about giving fodder to the conspiracy theorists...

The Time That Remains: Palestinians, Israelis & Israeli Arabs

Had Palestinian writer Raja Shehadeh ("Palestinian Walks") written the screenplay of The Time That Remains (poster at left, from the official site for the French release), the dwindling time might refer to the chance to hike the hills of Palestine before the Israelis completely cover them in concrete.  Or maybe the time remaining before Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman succeeds in expelling Arab Israelis from the land of their birth.

But the title of Israeli-Arab director/screenwriter Elia Suleiman's highly personal view of being an Arab in Israel may apply to family relations as much as Palestinian-Israeli relations, as in "appreciate your parents while they are still around," the theme so touchingly sketched in the recent Japanese film Still Walking.  In Suleiman's Nazareth of 1948 to the present, we see the Arab-Israeli conflict as experienced by and recounted to a boy growing up in a Palestinian family that has stayed on - in what has become part of Israel.

When I first saw the film's poster, I imagined that the little boy was getting a scolding from his father (it's actually the school headmaster; little Elia, it seems, is developing a reputation as a political dissident).  No, Suleiman's father Fuad (actor Saleh Bakri dominates the first third of the film as the young resistance fighter) is portrayed as a strong, silent type, who is left for dead after his capture in the 1948 fighting, and who spends the rest of his life under a cloud of Israeli suspicion that he hasn't abandoned his Palestinian nationalism.

We never see Suleiman-père old and frail.  He's the reliable go-to man for family and neighbors in a Nazareth left adrift, cut off from their cousins across the Green Line.  At the local school, children sing patriotic songs (but for which country?) in Hebrew and Arabic.

Though political themes are ever present (what honest film on the subject could avoid politics?), The Time That Remains is at times black comedic, and more than one reviewer (including Suleiman himself) has seen shades of Buster Keaton and Jacques Tati in the absurdity of Israeli-Jewish and Israeli-Arab relations.

The cinema in France where we saw "le Temps qu'il reste" distributed a very helpful flyer with a reprint from the Nouvel Observateur interview with Elia Suleiman, where he explains to Pascal Mérigeau that his novel view of the last sixty-plus years is his alone - and is not a documentary.  We read that "at 17 years old, I was accused of being a Communist sympathizer, and had 24 hours to make up my mind," which is how the young Suleiman ended up in London, which led to New York, which led to Paris...  This episode is alluded to in the film, when we see a teenaged Elia getting caught up in the first "Land Day" demonstrations to protest Israeli expropriation of its Arab citizens' land.

For objective students of the Arab-Israel conflict, The Time That Remains should stand up well to scrutiny.  For connoisseurs of the absurd, the film will show a collection of war and post-war situations that could be fodder for Ari Folman should Waltz With Bashir ever get a prequel.

In keeping with Suleiman's ambivalence over matters of nationality, statelessness, and patriotism, The Time That Remains was presented at Cannes 2009 as neither an Israeli nor a Palestinian film, but a product of France, Belgium, Italy, and the United Kingdom.  Suleiman, the "present absentee" Israeli/Palestinian/Expatriate and on-camera narrator of his own film, looks on silently at his life and gives us a rare look at the conflicted world of Arab-Israelis.

Cairo: Obama's 3 Rs - Respect, Rectitude, Resolve

No need for me to reprise President Obama's speech today at Cairo University - the White House website should have the text and video up soon, and the BBC already has an annotated version.  With our time zone advantage, we watched it live from our living room in Brussels, and a very stirring speech it was.

Respect was a repeated theme, no small matter for a religion - Islam - which has been the target of Western fear and disdain well before George W. Bush's benighted sojourn in the White House.   Whatever Rush Limbaugh may sputter tonight about the President of the United States quoting the Koran, Barack Obama's use of strategic texts from the Bible, the Torah, and the Koran struck a chord in the Cairo audience.

The man from Illinois had an Abe Lincoln air of moral rectitude when delivering The Truth to the audience.  Islam is too great a religion to be associated with terrorism (the unmentioned word), and there has to be room in the Middle East - specifically Jerusalem - for the people of the three great monotheistic religions.

The Truth, to Israeli listeners, also means that settlements are a major roadblock to a negotiated solution.  Hamas was addressed in a civil tone, perhaps a hint that change is afoot in the US attitude towards the party that won the Palestinian elections.

No one who has witnessed this President's first several months in office, or who listened to his speech in the Arab world's largest city, can doubt his resolve to do his utmost to bring a solution to the Israel-Palestine question.

More proof that Americans did themselves proud when they elected this man who, almost single-handed, is bringing the 3 Rs back to America's place in the world.

Turkey and Europe: Yes, No, or Impossible?

Years ago in a community development project in Ramallah, when it was still just a sleepy, recently-occupied West Bank town, one of my fellow volunteers, a devilish Turk named Ali, gave me language lessons. In Turkish body language, said Ali, you have the nodding of the head up and down for “yes,” the shaking side to side for “no,” and then something else. Tilting your head back to where your chin pointed to the onlooker (I’ve seen this elsewhere accompanied by a dismissive “tsk” sound) means “impossible.”

So which one is it to be for Turkey’s European Union hopes: yes, no, or - as in "you silly Turks, whatever made you think we’re genuine about those accession talks" - impossible?

Map of Turkey and its neighborhood, from the European Commission Enlargement website, “Turkey - Candidate Country Profile.” As in Perpetual Candidate?

To the annoyance of Nicolas Sarkozy (and I dare say a few others), US President Barack Obama, speaking at the Turkish Parliament yesterday, repeated that

The United States strongly supports Turkey’s bid to become a member of the European Union. (Applause.) We speak not as members of the EU, but as close friends of both Turkey and Europe. Turkey has been a resolute ally and a responsible partner in transatlantic and European institutions. Turkey is bound to Europe by more than the bridges over the Bosphorous. Centuries of shared history, culture, and commerce bring you together. Europe gains by the diversity of ethnicity, tradition and faith — it is not diminished by it. And Turkish membership would broaden and strengthen Europe’s foundation once more.

Obama and Sarkozy can agree on one thing: the US is not a member of the EU. The preceding is therefore called, in good American parlance, jawboning - “to influence by persuasion” (usually in domains where direct power is limited or, as in this case, nonexistent). But Turkey-in-Europe is both a geographic and demographic fact, and goes back centuries to the time when the Ottoman Empire - and latterly, the Young Turks - ruled large European territories.

This American stance on Turkey’s EU credentials is not new, but when Obama speaks of Europe “gaining in diversity,” he brings a certain credibility to the argument that Bush and others never had. As far as the US image is concerned, Obama had to surface from not only the generally abyssal depths into which Bush had sunk US-Muslim relations, but also had to repair damaged US-Turkish relations.

Who, other than Turkish democrats and US Democratic Congressman Barney Frank, remember then-Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz calling for the Turkish Army to exert its “traditional leadership role” (code for carrying out a coup d’état) in the face of the elected Turkish government’s opposition to allowing US military use of Turkish territory to invade Iraq in 2003? Frank called for Wolfowitz to resign. He eventually did, but for other reasons, and from a different job…

So Obama’s reference to “Turkey’s strong, vibrant, secular democracy” helps make amends for Bush and Wolfowitz dissing elected Turkish democrats, just because they were of the (moderate) Islamist persuasion and saw - like Obama did as a Senatorial hopeful back in 2003 - that invading Iraq was a sure-fire way to stir up a regional hornet’s nest.

That region - Turkey borders on 7 countries and is across the sea from another five - is why Turkey is important to NATO and potentially to the EU. We’ve long known Turkey for its troop-contributing potential as NATO’s second largest army, but, as Dr. Bahadir Kaleagasi, TUSIAD (Turkey’s Industrial Association) representative in Brussels said recently, “Turkey is either - or both - the northernmost country of the South or the southernmost country of the North.” Kaleagasi didn’t need to refer to Turkey’s ongoing mediation efforts between Israel and Syria (nor its attempts to get Hamas legitimated), but he did talk about Turkey’s position vis a vis Iran: “the Turkish-Iranian border is unchanged since medieval times, one of the world’s most ancient.” Interesting prospect, as the West enlists Turkey’s help in its efforts in the multiple regional challenges - Palestine/Israel, Iran, Afghanistan, and “Af/Pak.”

On the matter of Turkish membership in the European Union, I straddle a diplomatic “Errant European” and “Avuncular American” line. Expressing myself as an American, Europeans don’t want to hear another call from a Yank who should mind his business about the strategic interest and basic fairness of dealing honestly with a Candidate Country. As a dual American/Irish-European, I have nothing against Turkey’s Islamic identity, and agree with Obama when he sees the positives for diversity.

But I do honestly question whether the EU should expand indefinitely. And that doesn’t mean just the matter of Turkish accession. Can the EU limit enlargement to the countries on this map (essentially Turkey plus Croatia, Macedonia, and “potential candidate countries” in the rest of the Balkan peninsula)? Or will the process carry on as long as this applies: “Any country that satisfies the conditions for enlargement can submit an application.” The OSCE, by the way, has 56 member states, and the Council of Europe 47.  So there's a long way to go until "Europe" reaches its outer limits.

This post first appeared in "Errant European" (Euractiv/Blogactiv)

Diplomat Saves Damsel In Distress: A Career Footnote

This week, I'm cross-posting two entries in the series that The Hegemonist is running, "Foreign Service Interviews."  As I mentioned in Installment One, I urge you to check out TH, which is a great blog by a serving FS Officer who recently suspended blogging - and has thankfully resumed - when the State Department announced what appeared to be impossible pre-clearance guidelines for what is a rather instant medium.

Here, I address the question, "Please share your best FS story or greatest FS achievement."  Please note: I've done many other - mostly routine - jobs in the course of my Foreign Service career.  But in terms of story value, this one beats out the other "achievements."

-----------------------------------

They always say that consular officers have the best stories, and in my own experience, several forays into the consular world confirm that. Especially if human relations are high on your priority list. My "proudest achievement" dates back to the early '80s, when as Deputy Principal Officer I was also Consul in Alexandria, Egypt. Alas, the Consulate General is no more, a victim of the early '90s James Baker sacrifice of a slew of constituent posts in key regions of the world to make way for new US embassies in the former Soviet Republics. At least there's still a cultural center. But I digress.

A letter arrived at my office, addressed to the US Embassy in Cairo but with a return address in Alexandria. The writer, an American citizen in Alexandria, had no idea there was a US Consulate in her city. At the time, it was the second largest city in Africa, Cairo being the first. And why should she know? She was a young mother with several little boys, and she was sequestered in an apartment in a foreign city.

Here's the back story: my "Amcit" - let's call her "Lisa al-Siyasi" - had met a charming Saudi student at college in the States, gotten married, and had several children. Things hadn't worked out - he was rich, she wasn't, but there were probably more important incompatibilities - and they got divorced. Mr. al-Siyasi returned to Saudi Arabia, and sometimes vacationed at his parents' penthouse on the Mediterranean in Alexandria. Some years later, he cajoled Lisa into a summertime visit for her and the kids to the exotic Middle East. She took up his invitation for what in his mind was a one-way trip back to the bosom of his family.

That's about as much as I learned from Lisa's letter, plus this: she desperately wanted to escape. But she had no money, and her ex-husband kept her and the kids under virtual house arrest.

The only thing I could think of was to write her a letter on Consulate stationery, "convoking" her to the US Consulate. The ruse worked: an appointment was made, and her ex-husband even brought her to my office. Luckily, while he was busy looking up information in the Commercial section, Lisa and I had a few minutes to discuss her situation and get crucial information on her status and her family back in the States. Visit over, she was returned to her gilded cage.

Working with the State Department and the Embassy in Cairo, we established contact with Lisa's family in the States. They really didn't have much money, but they were able to scrape together enough funds to buy tickets for Lisa and her boys to return home. But how to arrange the "great escape?"

Mr. al-Siyasi and his rich-Saudi-playboy lifestyle was the key. Lisa and I were able to talk on the phone (a working phone in Egypt in those days was a rarity) while Mr. al-S. was sleeping well into lunchtime, working off his late nights and hard-partying. We cooked up a plan that centered on his being out of commission during the morning hours.

With key assistance from the Levantine manager of the local TWA office, and from an Alexandrian taxi service that we knew well, we procured tickets and arranged for an early morning pickup. Lisa and the boys were able to slip out of the apartment and were whisked off to Cairo while Mr. al-S. got his beauty sleep.

The part of the plan that caused us the most heartburn was the airline schedule: flights from Cairo to Europe and beyond had already left by the time our taxi man delivered Lisa and family to the airport hotel. Her tickets - issued under a variation of the name "al-Siyasi" - were for a flight leaving Cairo the next morning. We'd just have to sweat it out for another 24 hours.

In the meantime, back in Alexandria, Mr. al-S. woke up around noon to find his ex-wife and children gone. I was not surprised, therefore, to find him at the Consulate soon thereafter. I took the precaution of asking one of the Consulate's US Marine Security Guards to hang out in my office in civvies, but with a nightstick handy in case things got physical.

Whether it was the Marine's presence, or Saudi stoicism, I'll never know, but the meeting passed calmly enough. I feigned ignorance of Lisa's whereabouts, and he went off. But I knew that wasn't the end of the story.

Next day, Cairo airport. Lisa and boys show up at the TWA counter, and Mr. al-Siyasi is there. And he starts shouting in Arabic, "this woman is stealing my children!" to the gathering crowd. Lisa, who had feared this very outcome, was mortified.

Now, readers in the US Embassy circuit will recognize the term "expediter," those indispensable fixers who shepherd travelers through the complexities of customs, immigration, and security with minimal fuss and delay. We had arranged for such a man to help Lisa and the boys at the airport that day. But this man was not your garden-variety expediter. He was a retired Egyptian Army brigadier general, and his response to the shouting Mr. al-Siyasi?

"This Saudi is threatening this American lady," he told the Egyptian security guards present. I should note that in Egypt - home of the Pyramids, center of Arabic-language culture - there is a certain resentment of wealthy Gulf Arabs - but most especially Saudis - who flaunt their riches and their lack of culture and treat Egyptians like poor cousins, or much worse.

"This Saudi..." - well, that was more than sufficient to trigger the appropriate response, and as the sputtering Saudi was being dragged away, Lisa and boys were able to continue their check-in and their trip to freedom.

So ends my story, which remains my proudest achievement, and was accomplished in the years before US adoption of the Hague Abduction Convention, which might have complicated things. And we all had Mr. al-Siyasi to thank for having abducted his ex-wife and kids in a country where Saudis are loathed. It's not always as "easy" for Americans in similar situations.

--------------------------------

Note: This anecdote also illustrates another career essential, "job satisfaction."

Israel-US: Agrément Denied, Freeman Chas-tised

Another "I-forgot-to-post-it-note"

 Photo: "Do not forget to live," © Alexey Ivanov, iStockphoto

There is a special irony in having been accused of improper regard for the opinions of foreign governments and societies by a group so clearly intent on enforcing adherence to the policies of a foreign government – in this case, the government of Israel.  I believe that the inability of the American public to discuss, or the government to consider, any option for US policies in the Middle East opposed by the ruling faction in Israeli politics has allowed that faction to adopt and sustain policies that ultimately threaten the existence of the state of Israel.  It is not permitted for anyone in the United States to say so.  This is not just a tragedy for Israelis and their neighbors in the Middle East; it is doing widening damage to the national security of the United States.

Ambassador (ret'd) Chas Freeman, on his short-lived nomination to head the U.S. National Intelligence Council (NIC)

The ways of diplomacy are ancient and mysterious indeed:

...formal application for agrément, or consent, is made by the envoy being replaced. Then the new ambassador is sent forth with a letter of credence addressed by his head of state to the head of the host state to introduce the ambassador as his or her representative. In most major capitals a copy of credentials is now first...

Britannica.com, Extract from "Letter of credence (diplomacy)"

Diplomats know that host nations can sometimes reject the ambassadors who are proposed by foreign capitals.  Usually this takes place out of the limelight, like the story (apocryphal or not, I do not know) about the highly qualified prospective young female ambassador - a respected and hard-charging regional affairs expert - proposed to a Central American junta in the late Seventies.  The colonels' answer to Washington?  "Can't you just send us another middle-aged white male, like we're used to dealing with?"

The late great Arabist Hume Horan, probably the best-qualified representative to Saudi Arabia, was unceremoniously expelled - in part because he probably knew the country too well.  Chas Freeman - himself a former US Ambassador to Saudi Arabia - might now be suffering from the same fate.  He knows the Middle East too well - so much so that he questions the underpinnings of the sacrosanct Israel-US "special relationship."

But the operative terms in matters of agrément are "foreign" and "nation."  Not domestic political action committee or PAC, as in AIPAC's objection to Freeman for his questioning - as opposed to rote acceptance of - the Israeli tail wagging the American dog.

It is the Obama NIC's loss: Freeman appears to be a diplomat of uncanny ability.  Just read his masterful "Impressions of Arabia" from November 2007 for his insights into the troubled region.  His view of AIPAC/Israeli conniving to remove him: "Israel is driving itself toward a cliff."  There is an example of the kind of "tough love" that we were supposed to be hearing towards our MNNA (major non-NATO ally) from the new administration.

I can almost imagine the AIPAC lobbyists: "Can't you just appoint...?"  Remember, Wag The Dog ends badly.

Win One Lose One: Afghanistan and Iran

Afghanistan: 15 February 1989 - 15 February 2009

Having missed it when it was released in Europe last year, it was time to watch Charlie Wilson's War.  Today, exactly twenty years after the last Soviet troops withdrew from Afghanistan after Wilson's mujahideen blasted them out of the sky with U.S.-provided shoulder-fired missiles, Russians and other former Soviets are marking the day in cemeteries from Archangel to Almaty.  BBC correspondent Lyse Doucet recalls the final days here.  The Soviets are gone, but the Stingers still get aimed at foreign helicopters.

The advantage of watching Mike Nichol's film on DVD are the bonus tracks: a bio of former Democratic Congressman Wilson and a "making of" with plenty of good interviews.  These extras actually made me appreciate the film more than the film itself, which at times I felt glided over many of the moral and geopolitical ambiguities in exchange for a glib line of dialogue.  Plus the Moroccan extras posing as Afghan refugees in Peshawar were way too Hollywood to be credible.

Anyway, this is not a film review.  If you want a good one, read Stephanie Zacharek in Salon.

Milt Bearden, the ex-CIA operations guy who advised Nichols during the shooting of the film, worries about what Vanity Fair entitled "Obama's War" in an interview with Michael Hogan.  Additional troops might sound fine on the campaign trail, says Bearden, but

once you’re president you’re going to say, “Are the numbers important, or is the mission—the redefinition of the mission—more important?” My sense is that if you send more gunfighters, you get into more gunfights.

Bearden sees hope in the appointment of Richard Holbrooke as Af/Pak envoy - "he’s not going to be overly burdened with conventional wisdom."  Holbrooke, he of the Bosnia settlement, brings relevant negotiation clout to this job.  But partitioned Bosnia - like the U.K.-partitioned India/Pakistan, Israel/Palestine, Northern Ireland/Irish Republic, all having experienced various stages of non-war, non-peace - still has unhealed stitches and requires the presence of foreign troops.

Iran: February 1979 - February 2009

I've already written about Iran's 30th anniversary, but what I'd like to point out here are a couple of interesting BBC reports that show an Iran beyond the ubiquitous photos of the scowling Ayatollah and blindfolded US Embassy hostages.  Not to hide that reality, but to show that there is more to this country of 65 million people.

This morning on BBC World Service Radio, John Simpson put Iran in perspective in "From Our Own Correspondent."  He also put Iran's President Ahmadinejad in his place, describing the "political traffic jam" of layers of authority that transcend the presidential remit.

Last night on BBC World TV, Iranian affairs analyst Sadeq Saba (presumably a refugee from the Revolution, now visiting his native land(?)) started the first of a four-part series, "A Taste of Iran: A journey of discovery of a land and its culture through its cuisine."

If I were an Iranian cultural attache eager to project a more nuanced image to the West, nothing could be better than this in-depth look at a society that comes across as rather more complex than George W. Bush's "axis of evil" one-liner.  It's not heavy on political analysis; in fact there is none - Saba does plenty of that in his day job - but viewers can reach their own conclusions.

This February double whammy of significant anniversaries comes at a time when the Obama Administration is looking to explore new ways of dealing with both Iran and Afghanistan.  The latter - "graveyard of empires" - and the former - "Policeman of the Persian Gulf" under the Shah, according to Time Magazine in 1973 - have a way of entrapping big powers into their maw.

As the USSR learned 20 years ago today in Kabul, and as the US learned 30 years ago this month in Tehran.

30 Roman Candles: Iran 1979 - 2009

Just to save you from having to Google "Roman candle," here is Webster's definition: firework consisting of a tube that sends out a shower of sparks and a succession of balls of fire...

Rather a fitting metaphor for a 30th Islamic Revolution anniversary launch of its Omid satellite, no?

1979: the end of the reign of the Shah, who blew out no more birthday candles in his homeland.

It was the year where U.S. support of the Shah led to the takeover of the American Embassy in Tehran.  The start of 30 years of mutual recrimination, leading to fraught interaction with political Islam, from Algeria to Afghanistan.

1979 was my first year in the US Foreign Service.  One of my classmates in a consular training course became one of the hostages in Tehran, and later I studied Arabic with people who had been spirited out of Iran by a courageous Canadian Embassy.

The Financial Times has put together a nice interactive timeline of 30 years of Iranian-American relations, and the Middle East Institute has gathered 53 experts and academics to comment on the Revolution at 30.

Okay, so what's next?  Stanford's Abbas Milani, writing in the Boston Review ("Common Cause: Real Help for Iranian Democrats"), thinks that

Citizen diplomacy and solidarity must become a pillar of a new American policy in Iran. Regular civic contacts—inviting Iranian artists, musicians, filmmakers, scholars, and human rights activists to the United States—would be the natural first step. Sports exchanges, for which there are some precedents, and visits by tourists and business groups to Iran and the United States, can help create an atmosphere of mutual trust, a necessary prelude to the success of both citizen and state support for democracy in Iran.

We might have an early manifestation of such "citizen diplomacy" this very week.  Blogger Charles J. Brown in "Undiplomatic" spotted a State Department press release about the visit of

a delegation of 12 Americans, including eight female athletes, coaches, and managers representing USA Badminton, to Tehran, Iran, from February 3-9th.

Rather intriguing, I'd say, especially given all the speculation about "change" coming to US-Iranian relations, after the Bush Administration opened the door in its final days to allowing the US-based American Iranian Council (AIC) to establish an office in Tehran.

Admittedly, badminton teams and an AIC office do not a new policy make.  But amidst Israeli saber rattling, Iranian missile launching, and assorted predictions of war, these are hopeful little signs.

Watch for an Obama Administration decision on the establishment of an American diplomatic or consular office, which Bush considered and then put off for the new President's in box.

Update:  Bad news on the "soft power" front: News flash from the BBC: "The British Council says it has suspended all operations in Tehran after staff members were intimidated by the Iranian authorities. The council, which promotes cultural and educational ties, says pressure has been growing over its activities."   The orders came from the office of Iran's President, and there are indications that Iran's ultra-conservatives were increasingly worried about the effectiveness of the British Council's work.

As Abbas Milani says of efforts to engage with Iran, nothing is easy: "Only the wisdom and humanity of concerned and informed citizens, combined with a new prudence in American policy, can navigate the treacherous waters ahead."

Update II: Abbas Milani was so right.  As I was writing this post, the Iranians turned down the badminton team's visa application: " "The issuing of visa (sic) is a time-consuming procedure," said a Foreign Ministry spokesman.  As The Hegemonist said in his comment: "I can't believe the news that the Iranians botched the badminton and launched a satellite during Obama's first two weeks in office. It's beginning to look like they want to stay on America's bad side."  To paraphrase the Iranian spokesman, "The normalization of relation is a time-consuming procedure."  Decades-long.

(Photo of Iranian flag - MediationChannel.com)