Because of a printing error, Page 2 of the Emerald’s Monday edition was replaced with a page from The Daily Barometer, the student newspaper at Oregon State University. The content that should have run on that page has been re-edited and appears in today’s issue. View a PDF of Monday’s Page 2 here.
What do you get when you take one quasi-despotic Iranian president, fly him to an Ivy League campus in the heart of Manhattan, call him “astonishingly uneducated,” and then turn the mic over to let him speak his mind? The answer is one heck of an intercultural smack down.
I speak of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s appearance at Columbia University last Monday. And what a spectacle it was. Tickets to the event reportedly sold out in less than two hours, while throngs of protesters and onlookers gathered outside. Political pundits were quick to weigh in on the event – voicing their opinions days before the forum even took place. And there was no shortage of opinions.
Columbia President Lee Bollinger caught some big-time flak from the isolationist crowd for extending the invite. “How could you give this tyrant a platform to spew his hatred, and saturate the minds of our young students?” was their prevailing view. And perhaps they have a point. As president of the nation considered by many as a far greater terrorist threat than Iraq has ever been, Ahmadinejad has displayed a well-honed ability to provide sound bites ranging from anti-western, to anti-Israeli, to full blown anti-common sense. But he’s not even the primary voice of authority in Iran. That distinction goes to Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the nation’s Supreme Leader – he controls policies both foreign and domestic. This distinction makes Ahmadinejad’s role more one of hot-headed yes man than of legitimate political figure.
So I, for one, was surprised when most of the criticism was placed on Bollinger, when he bucked the common trend of cordiality in favor of a more pointed, confrontational introduction:
“Let’s then be clear,” Bollinger said to Ahmadinejad in front of the packed crowd that gathered to witness the spectacle. “You exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator.” Rather than humor the man, Bollinger went for a Tyson-esque first round knockout. The crowd ate it up. USA! USA! But Ahmadinejad wasn’t about to take that one lying down.
“I want to complain a bit on the person (Bollinger) who read this political statement against me… In a university setting, we must allow people to speak their mind, to allow everyone to talk so that the truth is eventually revealed by all.” It was a very subtle “Oh no you di-int’!” moment that even earned him applause from the audience.
Bollinger’s opening remarks sparked quite the controversy, as many expressed criticism over his verbal chastisement. My response to this criticism can be summed up in two words: Come on! What was everybody expecting – a glowing synopsis of his sterling resume? A firm handshake and profound thanks on behalf of the American people for promoting peace and freedom throughout the Middle East? The Ahmadinejad camp was even warned in advance that Bollinger’s opening remarks would be critical.
I’ll digress for a minute, to give the Iranian president some credit: Regardless of his views, he appears to be an intelligent, well-spoken individual. But if he has any sense whatsoever (and I’m assuming he has at least enough sense to be elected president of his country), he is aware of his image as public enemy number one in America. And anyone who thought otherwise was certainly disheartened by the exchange that followed. Rather than offer any hope for reconciliation between the two nations, he hammered away at the issues that continue to divide us.
Everyone knows his position calling the Holocaust’s factuality into question, and of his desire to see Israel “wiped off the map.” Both those nuggets of wisdom are old news. But it was his answer to a question concerning the executions of homosexuals in Iran that sent people home with something to talk about.
“In Iran, we don’t have homosexuals like in your country,” he said, producing a mixture of shock and laughter (mostly laughter) from the audience. “We do not have this phenomenon. I don’t know who’s told you that we have it.” All in all, the event failed to garner anything greater than a collective shrug – and a few timeless sound bites. Was I disappointed? Yes. But was I surprised? Not in the least.
