Charming Tyrants
David Ignatius, who I have disagreed with on a number of occasions, today writes a column that falls into a trap of his own making. It is almost always a bit dangerous to reason by analogy, especially in the short term. Ignatius likens the situation between the West and Iran to Iranian driving habits. Chaotic, menacing, but ultimately usually successful.
TEHRAN — Drivers here play a high-risk game of chicken at every intersection. They barge into the frantic stream of traffic and you think there's going to be a crash for sure. But at the last moment someone usually gives way, and a collision is avoided.
Watching President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at a news conference here Tuesday, I had the same mesmerizing anxiety as a passenger in a Tehran taxi. He has moved boldly — recklessly, it seems to Americans — into the international traffic flow. He keeps revving his motor, and it looks as if he and the West might be heading for a dangerous crackup over Iran's nuclear program. Will there be a collision, or will leaders produce a compromise at the final instant? Normally, drivers here stop in time — except when they don't.
Well, it's as good an analogy as any other in an imperfect world, I suppose. Ignatius goes on to explain that the average Iranians don't want sanctions, but also are not really very worried about them. Where Ignatius falls into a trap of his own making is here, I think:
Seeing Ahmadinejad up close, you appreciate the fact that he is a formidable politician. He played the roomful of 150 journalists like a master performer. He has the look of a bantamweight fighter — compact and agile, punching well above his weight. He's quick on his feet, answering a broad range of questions, including some critical ones about the Iranian economy, but he came away unscratched. He speaks more softly than you'd expect, making jokes and, on this occasion, avoiding some of his usual anti-Israel bombast. But the hard edge is never far away. His eyes can twinkle one moment and then suddenly become dark as night. My strongest feeling at the end of his performance was: He may be cocky and eccentric, but don't underestimate him.
So Ignatius, falling for the immediate charm of the performance fails to see the other analogy that is present in the room. One of the most common traits tyrants have is that people who talk about them after meeting them is that they were charming. Quick and witty and able to play a room to the hilt. Ignatius, who I think has been more than a bit of an apologist on a number of occasions recently, seems not to see that Ahmadinejad is no different than any other charming tyrant with Messianic visions and dreams. Ignatius falls under the spell of the charming tyranny.
And doesn't see that his traffic analogy is more apt than he realizes. But it is a collision that is coming, not a last minute slamming on of the brakes.
Because charming tyrants have a poor record for yielding the right of way.
