What Would Alexander The Great Do?
I try to keep politics out of my public presence, but I just have to comment on the imprisonment in Iran of journalist Roxana Saberi.
All the pundits and experts I’ve listened to have explained the imprisonment as a inflammatory instigation by hard-right partisans in Iran, who just want to push our buttons and derail any hope for detente.
I doubt it.
This is certainly a TEST of how the Obama administration will react to, and deal with, a disagreement with the Iranian government.
Some History.
According to Mary Renault ( a well-respected historical conjecture author who based her work on ancient and eyewitness acccounts), in her book The Persian Boy, Roxana is a “close approximation” in Western language of the name of Alexander the Great’s Bactrian second wife, translating from Persian to Greek to English. Supposedly meaning “little star”, Roxana is more properly pronounced with the accent of the first syllable – WROX-ann-ah.
Back to Alexander.
At the time he took Roxana as his second wife (around 330 B.C.), he was almost literally king of the world. The only rival at the time was the Persian Empire, which held massive sway over the Middle East and Central Asia. Alexander had temporarily subdued the Persians – even razed the beautiful city of Persepolis to the ground.
Now – what would Alexander do if his wife had been abducted by the ancient Persian empire?
Most likely he’d have turned his army around, pursued and waged war with no quarter until he had her back and had reduced the Persians to total subservience. No doubt with disastrous results. Alexander was Great, but his empire did not hold for long following his death.
But this never happened. It’s just a “what if.”
Are we going to mimic Alexander? Or are we going to model ourselves after the Roman Empire instead? The Romans - despite disagreements, political intrigue and skirmishes – managed to keep peace with the Middle Eastern and Central Asian powers from Armenia to India for hundreds of years. (Except for the Levant and Palestine – I am definitely not counting those areas at the moment.)
I repeat – in my opinion this is a test in the time-honored tradition of Persia going back several thousand years. Of course they know the charges are groundless! It is our RESPONSE they want to see.
on Apr 21st, 2009 at 11:28 am
Interesting comparison to Alexander’s days. I agree that the situation has to be coming from the Iranian government. And, of course, if our press said so, it would be regarded as inflammatory or, worse, in the Iranian press, coming from our government.
If this is a test of our reactions then it is a test of our nuclear intentions.
on Apr 21st, 2009 at 12:42 pm
How about that. I didn’t even know you had a blog. And I have no doubt you know alot more about history than I do. I am not sure if I understood what you were saying , but after reading your blog I thought, why couldn’t it be both? A time honored test and also an attempt to block peaceful relations, that is. On PBS tonight at least one person said no one in the Iranian government really thinks she is a spy, she wasn’t even a very radical journalist anyway, so clearly the whole thing is some form of test or posturing, and it can conveniently serve different purposes for people desiring a variety of outcomes.
Hopefully Obama will keep his cool as usual and the rest of the world will apply pressure and that poor woman will get to come home.
The linguistic part of what you wrote about is interesting. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
on Apr 21st, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Thanks for your comments – interesting takes from both of you.
Annie, you could be right – two tactics in one. To clarify what I originally meant, I believe that the culture of diplomacy is very different in the Middle East, and that there are similarities in ancient and modern times. They just do things differently over there, and that we in the U.S. often misinterpret intentions. The analogy to history was to point out that “traditional” reactions are a choice between Confrontation and Appeasement. On the one hand, not backing down is a source of respect, and total appeasement a sign of weakness. Somewhere in between is the “right” way – in the past, it meant being patient and demanding respect, without provoking an opponent into a corner.
Greta – you certainly could be right that it’s related to the whole nuclear weapons issue. If we pass “this” test, perhaps the Iranian government will deal with the U.S. and the west differently from now on.
I don’t know – it’s just a theory!
on Dec 19th, 2011 at 6:18 pm
[...]very few internet sites that transpire to be detailed below, from our point of view are undoubtedly nicely really worth checking out[...]