President Obama reached out to the Iranian people and leadership . . . New Year holiday of Nowruz. In a new Q&A written from Dubai, Carnegie’s Karim Sadjadpour discusses the president’s overture, its likely reception among Iranians, and next steps for U.S. policy makers.

Why did President Obama choose this occasion for his video message to Iran?

It’s very thoughtful timing. In acknowledging Nowruz, President Obama showed the Iranian people that he has an appreciation for their culture and history. In Dubai, the reaction among the huge Iranian expat community has been overwhelmingly and universally positive.

Was there anything about the tone and language of Obama’s remarks that struck you as particularly significant or deliberate?

Obama made it clear to Tehran’s leadership that his administration is committed to diplomacy, and is genuinely interested in overcoming the tremendous mistrust that has developed over the last three decades. He mentioned the word “respect” several times, which is what Iran’s leaders always claim U.S. policy has lacked.

How would you rate Obama’s foreign policy toward Iran thus far?

It’s only been a couple months, but thus far I think the Obama administration’s approach to Iran has been more informed and nuanced than that of any U.S. administration in the last 30 years. Obama has been respectful without projecting weakness, which is always a difficult feat to achieve.

What can we expect Obama’s effort to accomplish?

Ultimately it takes two to tango, and at the moment, hardliners in Tehran who are not interested in having an amicable relationship with the United States have an inordinate amount of influence.

Rather than strengthen these hardliners, Obama’s overtures will put pressure on them to justify their often gratuitous enmity toward the United States. Most Iranians recognize that, in 2009, the “death to America” culture of 1979 is obsolete—it only prevents the country from fulfilling its enormous potential.

Whereas the Bush administration united Iran’s disparate political actors against a common external threat, the Obama administration, I believe, is going to deepen the divisions and incongruities among Iran’s political elites.

Is there a consensus in Iran about re-establishing relations with the United States?

U.S. policy makers must recognize that certain Iranian elites, and others among the country’s allies in the region do not want to see a rapprochement between Iran and the United States, because that would diminish their influence and open them up to new kinds of competition. A small group of spoilers will likely attempt to subvert serious dialogues, perhaps by jailing Iranian-Americans on trumped-up charges, or sending new, large and conspicuous weapons shipments to Hamas or Hizbollah. But if the United States ends its confidence-building efforts in retaliation, it will strengthen the influence of hardliners seeking to derail an eventual reconciliation.

How should the Obama administration craft its rhetorical approach to Iran?

Hostile American rhetoric allows the Iranian leadership to portray the United States as an aggressor, and Obama’s remarks were very carefully crafted to play down that perception. But Obama should also be mindful of who he talks to, and when. (By Karim Sadjadpour)

Karim Sadjadpour is an associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He is a regular contributor to BBC World TV and radio, CNN, National Public Radio, and PBS NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, and has written for the Economist, Washington Post, New York Times, International Herald Tribune, and New Republic.

Source: http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=22880

See http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/08/ballen.iran/index.html.

Any attack on Iran would have catastrophic consequences for Iran and the region and would dwarf the ongoing tragedy in Iraq. It would drastically reduce security on all sides for generations to come. There would be no winners, only devastation.

We, the constituents of “Iranians for Peace,” believe that a broad- based opposition to war among Iranians can discourage a march to war. Based on humanitarian grounds, we call on all Iranians and non-Iranians everywhere to stand united in opposing military intervention in Iran.

We urge both sides to take measures to reduce tensions and initiate comprehensive and unconditional negotiations between Iran and the United States to create an opening for meaningful progress toward understanding and peace.

Source: http://www.iraniansforpeace.net/about.html#founding.

– Qur’an 2:62

59% of Israelis support a two-state solution – only 36% oppose it.

61% of Palestinians support a two-state solution – only 23% oppose it.

According to surveys conducted by the Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace (June 2009)

Non-Violence:

80% of Palestinians would support a large-scale non-violent protest movement and 56% would participate in its activities.

78% of Israeli Jews believe that the Palestinians have a legitimate right to seek a Palestinian state, provided that they use non-violent means.

According to a survey commissioned by the seach for Common Ground (SFCG), the world’s largest conflict prevention and resolution nongovernmental organization, and conducted the University of Maryland (2002).

• Foster, develop, defend, protect and further mobilize moderate American Muslims in their progress toward integration as an equal and respected religious community in the American interfaith environment;
• Define the future of Islam in America as a community opposed to the politicization of our religion, its radicalization and its marginalization, which has taken place because of the imposition on Muslims of attitudes opposed to American values, traditions, and policies;
• Educate the broader American public about the reality of moderate Islam and the threat to moderate Muslims and non-Muslim Americans represented by militant, political, radical and adversarial tendencies.

For more information, visit http://www.islamicpluralism.org.

PeacePaint compiles important information about the Peace and Green movements and publishes eye-catching articles, slideshows and videos.

PeacePaint people are aggressive at guerrilla marketing non-violence and ecological logic through newsletters, viral videos and merchandising. We are generous, investing all of our resources in pro-social marketing.

PeacePaint is funded by Intelligent Design (ID) apparel, who makes fashionable, cause-driven t-shirts. PeacePaint affiliates make money by placing ID banners on their websites. When anyone from an affiliate website purchases anything from the ID store, ID pays 10% of the total sale directly to their affiliate. Click here to find out more.

About Time

Imagine a global economy offering fair opportunities to everyone and hope of a better future for all of our children. Efforts to attain that dream will do more to stop terrorism and avoid war than would any homeland security system or deadly weapon.

-Muhammad Ali

Remember 2001, Right Wing Republicans were pushing American to war with Iraq Most of us supported the invasion:

For revenge against Iraq for their role

in the September 11th attacks.

To prevent Iraq from attacking U.S.

with weapons of mass destruction.

From fear that Islamic fundamentalist

terrorists will murder us.

Now, we know that those Right Wing Republicans lied to us about the first two reasons:

Iraq – played no role in the 9/11

attacks.

Iraq – had no weapons of mass destruction.

Yet, we are still so afraid of “Islamic fundamentalism” that America continues to:

Send our young men and women to die and kill in Iraq.

Spend more tax money on Militarization – $1.2 trillion dollars per year – than on healthcare,

education, social services, scientific research, transportation and renewable energy,

combined.

Now, thank God and thanks to democracy, America has:

A Democratic administration promoting peaceful foreign policy.

President Barrack Obama and Secretary Hilary Clinton who are willing to engage in

meaningful conversations with legitimate Islamic leaders.

But, the Right Wing war machine is still filling our eyes and ears with hateful messages.

Google the phrase, “Islam peaceful religion” and you will find dozens of posts

denouncing Islam as a Warlike religion.

Most of them start with a statement like, ‘there are a lot of stories in the

mainstream/liberal media saying that Islam is a peaceful religion,’ then give

examples of acts of violence committed by people who are Muslims, then supply

quotes from Islamic extremes and pick passages from the Quran which advocate

violence.

None of them cite any actual mainstream media sources saying that, nor do they

acknowledge Muslim leaders who advocate peace or site passages from the

Quran which advocate non-violence.

These posts reflect beliefs driven by eight years of right wing pro-war propaganda.

Right now, Americans can support President Obama by sharing:

Messages from Muslim leaders or passages of the Quran that advocate non-violence.

Information about legitimate grievances that people in Islamic nations may have against

Western nations, their armies and their corporations.

Stories about the vast majority Muslims who support and work for peace.

You might want to take a few minutes to read the following examples:

Islam is a Peaceful Religion,

. . . Whenever one wishes to speak about Islam as a religion of peace, the question

naturally springs to mind that, whereas there are so many religions in the world such

as Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc., when it comes to finding out

whether Islam is a religion of peace, why should Islam be the odd one out?

One reason for this is that a few years after the beginning of Islam, anti-Islamic

powers began a propaganda that Islam is a religion of extremism and violence and

wants to compel others into belief by means of the sword. This, of course, is

incorrect. In the beginning, the Muslims of Makkah suffered persecution but they

remained silent. Finally, they migrated to Madinah but there too the disbelievers

hounded the Muslims and forced upon them a battle to which I will revert later. The proof against those opponents who allege that Islam was spread by the sword is that although the disbelievers of Makkah raised all sorts of objections, history stands witness to the fact that the people of Makkah themselves never complained that the Muslims had used the sword against the disbelievers to compel them to change their faith.

Secondly, what has given Islam a bad name is an ugly and awful image of extremism presented, whether knowingly or unwittingly, by some Muslim groups and organizations, and these groups unfortunately had personal vested interests…

From a  Lecture by Hadrat Mirrza Masroor Ahmad, Supreme Head of the Worldwide Ahmadiyya Muslim Community.  June 18, 2009:

//www.alislam.org/islam/islam-peaceful-religion.pdf

Non-Violence and Islam

Islam is a religion which teaches non-violence. According to the Qur’an, God does not love fasad, violence. What is meant here by fasad is clearly expressed in verse 205 of the second Surah. Basically, fasad is that action which results in disruption of the social system, causing huge losses in terms of lives and property.

Conversely, we can say with certainty that God loves non-violence. He abhors violent activity being indulged in human society, as a result of which people have to pay the price with their possessions and lives. This is supported by other statements in the Qur’an. For instance, we are told in the Qur’an that peace is one of God’s names (59:23). Those who seek to please God are assured by verse 5 of the sixteenth surah that they will be guided by Him to “the paths of peace.” Paradise, which is the final destination of the society of God’s choice, is referred to in the Qur’an as “the home of peace” (89:30), etc.

The entire spirit of the Qur’an is in consonance with this concept. For instance, the Qur’an attaches great importance to patience. In fact, patience is set above all other Islamic virtues with the exceptional promise of reward beyond measure (39:10).

* * *

This paper was presented at the Symposium on Islam and Peace sponsored by Non-Violence International and The Mohammed Said Farsi Chair of Islamic Peace at the American University Washington D.C.

In October 1997, I met a 36-year old European, Leon Zippo Hayes, who was born in the city of Christchurch in New Zealand. After having studied Islam, he has changed his religion. His Islamic name is Khalilur Rahman. Passing through Muslim countries he is going to perform Hajj by land.

During the conversation he said that in modern times Muslims are engaged in bloody war at many places, at some places with others and at other places among themselves. This had led him (like many others) to conclude that perhaps Islam was a religion of violence. Later, he studied the Qur’an with the help of translations, and when he reached this verse in the Qur’an: ‘Whoever killed a human being should be looked upon as though he had killed all mankind (5:32),’ he said that he was so moved that he could not believe that it was in the Qur’an.This incident is broadly indicative of the thinking of non-Muslims on Islam. On seeing the actions of Muslims, people today find it hard to believe that Islam may be a religion of peace. But if Muslims stop engaging in violent activities and give people the opportunity to appreciate Islam in its original form, then certainly a great number of people would realise as they never had before that Islam was a peaceful religion and they would rush to it, saying that it was exactly the religion which their souls had been seeking all along.

Source: http://www.alrisala.org/Articles/papers/nonviolence.htm

After Years of Violence Muslim’s Address Core Issues of Faith

(Johns Hopkins Newsletter 4/2/09) A simple Google search on the phrase “violence and Islam” will, more often than not, bring up Web sites that brand Islam as a violent and belligerent faith.

According to American Values, a conservative non-profit organization, “there is overwhelming and disturbing proof that a deep culture of violence, a culture of death, pervades much of the Muslim world.”

These skewed representations of the Islamic faith have forced many Muslims to actively address the question of violence and whether or not Islam is an inherently violent faith.

“To continually insist that Islam is naturally violent assumes a magical quality to the Quranic text, whereby Muslims are forced to be guided by it, while Christians and Jews are entirely free to interpret their texts as they please,” senior Nadia Khan said.

“Of course innumerable Muslims, Christian and Jews read their holy scriptures without being incited to violence. In fact Islam, like other world religions, has a complex history of shifting interpretations, and there is certainly a recognized distinction between the divine text and human approaches to it.” (By Husain Danis)

Source: http://media.www.jhunewsletter.com/media/storage/paper932/news/2009/04/02/NewsFeatures After.Years.Of.Violence.Muslims.Address.Core.Issues.Of.Faith-3696687.shtml

Dalai Lama Defends Islam As Peaceful Religion

The Dalai Lama believes “it’s totally wrong, unfair” to call Islam a violent religion.  The spiritual leader said that he has been reaching out to Muslims since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.  Source: Michael Rubinkam, AP, Bethlehem, July 13  2008

Bill Jemas, Peacepaint