Back in 2003, I was against plans for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, and I made my objections known and clear in a variety of forums. But once it became clear that the invasion was proceeding irrespective of my stands and those of my colleagues, I wished it well and, wanting it to succeed, I tried in my capacity as an activist, no matter how small, marginal and limited, to help the democratization and state-building efforts through our work at the Tharwa Project. After all, the brunt of failure, as I argued then, will be borne mostly by the Iraqi people, and the prodemocracy activists working around the region, as later developments have clearly demonstrated. How can I wish for U.S. failure then?
Now, and in regard to the nuclear deal with Iran, I find myself facing a similar situation: I don’t believe in the deal, and I see a myriad way for it to backfire. But I am willing, and hoping, to be wrong, because, once again, the price of failure will be borne by us. In fact, it is already being paid, and has been for the last four years.
So, despite my apprehension and misgivings, I really hope that I am wrong, and those figures and forces who stood behind the deal are right in thinking that the deal, in addition to tackling the nuclear issue effectively, will, somehow, serve to temper Iran’s belligerent regional attitude. And I am, of course, willing to test that assumption by demanding that Iran plays a constructive role in resolving the Syrian conflict, even if it means making some serious and painful concessions to the opposition.
Indeed, I am currently crossing my fingers and entrails, and will be pushing head on into the fray over the next few weeks and months, trying to promote our recently framed peace plan for Syria, which would naturally require Iranian support.
That’s the only way for me to “celebrate” this turn of events, I guess. After all, the agreement was partly inked with the blood of my people.