When Everyone Wants Peace, Yet the War Continues
Everyone talks about peace. Everyone says they do not want war. And yet the missiles continue to be fired, the threats continue, and new conditions are imposed every day.
To understand a war, sometimes we have to look at the actions of its leaders.
Because I believe the answer lies in one fundamental difference: peace is something entirely different from surrender. That is why the war continues.
Iran is a clear example. This war was not started by Iran. Iran did not want war. War was imposed on Iran, and Iran, like any country that has been attacked, has the right to defend itself.
But clearly, something else was expected of Iran: that when attacked, it should not defend itself, should not resist, and should eventually sit at the negotiating table without argument and accept the other side’s conditions.
That is an illusion, because Iran will never surrender. The United States has completely mistaken the government and people of Iran for those of other countries.
I support Iran because I believe Iran should not be forced to surrender simply because its opponent has greater military and economic power. The United States cannot force a country into war, bomb it, threaten it, and place economic pressure on it, and then accuse that country of refusing to surrender.
This is no longer diplomacy. It is an abuse of power to impose one’s will.
If the United States truly wants peace, the path is clear.
Stop the bombing. End the threats and pressure, and sit at the negotiating table. Both sides must negotiate, rather than one side giving orders while the other simply signs.
Because the United States needs to understand one thing:
Greater power does not mean greater rights, nor does it give one country the authority to make decisions for others.
Iran may have many problems. But none of them gives the United States the right to interfere in the lives of the Iranian people or in their government.
As a side note: Iran’s current position shows that refusing to surrender is not the same as refusing to negotiate. If negotiations are to take place, they must be between two sides, not meetings in which the United States dictates its conditions to Iran.
Therefore, the problem is that the United States still believes that negotiation means Iran surrendering to its demands.
Whereas real peace is based on mutual concessions. When one side threatens, imposes sanctions, attacks, and then says, “Let’s negotiate now, but first you must accept my conditions,” that is not negotiation. It is an expectation that the other side will surrender.
Personally, I hate war and do not want it to continue. However, I firmly believe that ending the war should not be confused with humiliating Iran or forcing it to surrender.
Iran can negotiate; an agreement can be reached. But surrender is not negotiation. Perhaps those who speak of peace today should ask themselves a simple question:
If the goal is peace, why should Iran be the first to surrender?
The United States cannot lead a war and then call itself a peacemaker.
You cannot drop bombs with one hand and wave the flag of peace with the other.
Peace imposed by one side and silently accepted by the other is not real peace.
Peace means ending the war without taking away a nation’s independence and freedom of choice.
I stand with Iran, and I will stand with it until the very end.
Because if the goal is peace, no nation and no government should be forced to surrender in order to escape a war it did not start.
Author: Gouya Roshan
All rights reserved

Comments
Post a Comment