In defence of the âcontroversialâ decision to broadcast the alternative Christmas speech by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Dorothy Byrne, the head of Channel 4 News and Current Affairs commented: “As the leader of one of the most powerful states in the Middle East, President Ahmadinejadâs views are enormously influential, as we approach a critical time in international relations, we are offering our viewers an insight into an alternative world view.” How benevolent of Channel 4, it was Christmas after all.
What a shame then, that what was actually presented was an insipid speech lacking any form of insight into the cultural or political infrastructure of Iran and its relation with the world.
In his token grey suit, Ahmadinejad was given enough time to spout a vacuous âspiritualâ message infused with political jibes devoid of substance. His comment âIf Christ were on Earth today, undoubtedly He would stand with the people in opposition to bullying, ill-tempered and expansionist powers,â is a transparent allusion to America and Israelâs foreign policy, and was ironically followed by âUndoubtedly He would hoist the banner of justice and love for humanity to oppose warmongers, occupiers, terrorists and bullies the world overâ.
The hypocrisy is so blatant that it is ridiculous coming from a president doing everything in his power to trample on the banner of âjusticeâ in his own country. Under his administration, juvenile executions have escalated, peaceful protests stifled, womenâs rights further reduced, and the existence of homosexuality denied. Try telling Arash and Kamir Alai, two physicians renowned for their work on AIDS who are in arbitrary detention without a charge, that their President isnât a bully. Or Zaynab Bayazidi who is serving a four year prison term for being a member of the Human Rights Organisation of Kurdistan, whether she believes the sincerity of Ahmadinejadâs message.
Unfortunately for Channel 4, Ahmadinejadâs speech wasnât sensational. It was a waste of time. If it had shown what Ahmadinejad really ÂÂÂÂthinks, it could have been an edifying insight into the policies of an âenormously influentialâ politician. But the president isnât that stupid. It afforded him the means to present the benign image he is so eager to promote; on the critical issues concerning Iran and the Middle East he remains strategically silent.Â
Ultimately, this was a mundane and mendacious PR stunt, and did little to enlighten in Byrne’s âcritical time in international relations.â