It’s like that joke about the hot dog vendor outside the bank.
Business is brisk as he services the employees of three office
buildings. One day an old friend stops by and asks if he can spot
him twenty bucks until Tuesday. “Sorry, Phil,” he says. “It would
be a violation of my deal with the bank.” “Really, how’s that?” The
street peddler explains: “They promised not to sell hot dogs and I
promised not to lend money.”
We had hoped that when we attacked Iraq and left Iran in
business, this would be the agreement: they could sell the Persian
rugs while we handle the regional statesmanship. Instead the
vaporings of Ahmadinejad on all matters great and small echo
bizarrely through the bazaar.
Still, it doesn’t do to acknowledge his blithering blather. King
Solomon wrote (Proverbs 26:4,5): “Don’t answer a fool according to
his folly, lest you also be like him. Answer a fool according to
his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes.” The major commentators
explain this to mean that you need to make a judgment. If the
foolish argument is advanced in a hostile and thoughtless way, then
don’t engage or you end up in a shouting match. If he advances it
in an intellectual way, then you need to engage, so he does not
walk away thinking that he won a debate. Clearly, Ahmadinejad, by
that standard, should best be ignored.
But his most recent outburst, whether founded in the garrulous
froth of madness or some Machiavellian manufacture of regional
tension, is worth our analysis and response. Not because we need to
engage him but because there is an absolutely fascinating
historical lesson coupled with an exquisite irony, and it serves us
well to see that they register.
For some time, he has been tarring Israel as an “illegitimate
regime.” This has provided a handy new tag phrase for Arab and
other agitators, and a quick Google search yields oceans of prose
as stilted and purple as Barney the Dinosaur. (The Iranians are not
Arabs but Persians. According to Biblical history and Jewish
tradition, the Persians stem from Japheth, the third son of Noah,
while the Arabs descend from Ishmael, son of Abraham, whose line
originates with Shem, first son of Noah.) Several days ago, he
added a new wrinkle: Israel is an arbitrary transplant from another
continent in contravention of two thousand years of Middle East
history.
Well, the Talmud says: “People who insult others use their own
flaws for insults.” All of us have, at one time or another, been
called ignorant by the ignorant and selfish by the selfish. Well,
how about this for a classic example of that phenomenon?
Ahmadinejad is casting aspersions on a regime for being out of
synch with the past two millennia. Okay, let’s have a look at his
own little operation.
In 1979, his band of Islamic thugs deposed the last Shah, Reza
Pahlavi. Shah was the Persian word for monarch, related to such
historic titles as Caesar, Czar and Kaiser. (In the guttural Farsi
enunciation, it comes out sounding like Shvah, which explains the
Talmudic pun of referring to it as Shavur, meaning ‘broken’ in
Hebrew.) The startling thing about this particular kingdom is that
it enjoyed the longest consecutive reign in the recorded saga of
mankind. Although their power was somewhat eclipsed by the
suzerainty of the Ottomans, then the British, it is essentially
correct to say that they ruled uninterrupted for 2500 years.
To review: first they were local. They built strength, made a
power sharing deal with the Medes, and conquered Babylon (Iraq)
about 150 years later. Since Babylon had destroyed the first Temple
of Israel, the fate of the Jews was now under Persian control. King
Cyrus of Persia gave permission to begin construction on the second
Temple. The building was completed under King Darius, and most of
the Jews moved back to Israel.
About a century later, the Greeks defeated Persia and stripped
its holdings. Then came the Romans, who eventually demolished the
second Temple. From that point forward, until the State of Israel
emerged 1880 years later, the Jews never again had significant
autonomy in their homeland.
So whose claim is weaker? Who is guiltier of spurning history?
The Jews who reinstated the government that they lost long ago, but
who made sure to rebuild it in ways that reflected the rhythms of
the contemporary era? Or the Khomeini clones who tore down the last
true monument to ancient civilization and who undid the modernity
that that strikingly adaptable kingdom had embraced? Ahmadinejad
and his gang managed to wipe out a great legacy and take their
people back to the Dark Ages in one paradoxical maneuver.
Here’s some advice, Mr. Commoner, Mr. Pretender, Mr. Usurper.
Best not to bring up pedigree.
