In recent events at Princeton University, a stark contrast emerged between the peaceful protest by a group of Iranians—who have personally suffered under the brutality of the Islamic ruling system—and a sit-in by some US students.
Just like other students on US campuses, these students displayed flags of Hamas and Hezbollah and labeled these entities as "resistance groups." This troubling endorsement starkly clashes with the profound grievances of those who have experienced the true nature of such groups first-hand.
The Iranian protest at Princeton was not just a demonstration against Seyed Hossein Mousavian, a former Iranian ambassador to Germany and a figure deeply intertwined with Tehran’s oppressive apparatus. It was a plea for recognition of the agonies inflicted by the Islamic Republic, which has left deep scars on the Iranian people through relentless suppression of dissent and promotion of terrorism.
Mousavian’s tenure in the 1990s coincided with some of the darkest days of repression and external terrorist activities orchestrated by Tehran, including the systematic assassinations of 24 Iranian intellectuals and activists across Europe. His current academic position at Princeton starkly contrasts with his past, serving as a painful reminder to the victims' families of the injustice that continues to elude the international community’s full recognition and response.
Simultaneously, a group of US students conducted a "solidarity sit-in," with Hamas mirroring similar demonstrations across numerous college campuses. This perspective reveals a concerning disconnect from the historical and ongoing realities these organizations represent.
Historical Context and the Impact of Designating Terrorists as 'Resistance'
Hamas and Hezbollah are officially designated as terrorist organizations by the United States and several other countries. This designation is based on a history of violent actions that include suicide bombings, rocket attacks, and other forms of terrorism aimed at civilian populations. Their activities have contributed to the destabilization of regions and inflicted severe suffering upon countless innocents.
Moreover, Hezbollah’s involvement in the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing, which killed hundreds of US and French military personnel, is a grim exemplar of the group’s long-standing hostility towards Western nations and their regional allies. This act of terrorism, along with numerous others, underscores the inherent danger in romanticizing groups that actively undermine peace and security.
The Plight of Women and LGBTQ+ Under Islamist Regimes
The endorsement of Islamist groups by some Western students overlooks the severe implications these regimes have for human rights, particularly concerning women and the LGBTQ+ community. Wherever these Islamist groups have gained power, the result has been chaos, the erosion of civil liberties, and the imposition of draconian laws that strip away the rights and freedoms of women and LGBTQ+ individuals. The Iranian "Woman Life Freedom Movement" exemplifies the courageous struggle of Iranian women against a brutal regime that systematically oppresses them. This movement highlights the stark contrast between the aspirations of these brave women and the harsh realities imposed by theocratic governance. Furthermore, in groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, there is a conspicuous absence of women or LGBTQ individuals in any positions of leadership, reflecting a broader ideology that views women as lesser beings and severely restricts the rights and freedoms of the LGBTQ+ community. This fundamental disrespect for equality and human dignity underlines the dangers of supporting such groups under the guise of political resistance.
Complicity in Academia: The Role of Educators in Shaping Perceptions
Compounding the issue is the stance of some academics within Western universities, whose endorsement or passive acceptance of extremist ideologies under the guise of intellectual debate contributes significantly to the normalization of groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. Professors and educators entrusted with shaping young minds play a pivotal role in either challenging or perpetuating dangerous misconceptions about what constitutes legitimate resistance versus terrorism.
In several academic circles, a troubling trend exists where the lines between critical discussion and outright support for militant actions blur. By framing these groups as legitimate resistance movements and focusing predominantly on their opposition to Western policies without equally scrutinizing their methods of violence and governance, these educators foster a one-sided narrative that ignores the broader, often devastating implications of these groups’ actions on civilians.
This academic endorsement can give unwarranted legitimacy to extremist views, making it crucial for educational institutions to maintain a balanced perspective that rigorously examines all aspects of such groups. Universities must encourage critical thinking and promote a comprehensive understanding of geopolitical issues, one that respects human rights and rejects any form of violence targeting innocents under the guise of political struggle.
Educational leaders and faculty members are responsible for guiding their students toward informed, ethical viewpoints on international politics, emphasizing the importance of peace, security, and respect for all human lives. By doing so, they can help prevent the spread of misinformation and the glorification of violence, ensuring that the next generation of leaders and thinkers advocates for genuine justice and peace, not masked by the banners of terror.
As the world continues to grapple with the complexities of international relations, terrorism, and the struggle for human rights, the need for clear-eyed scrutiny of all entities that purport to fight for justice but employ terror and suppression cannot be overstated. The future of global security and the preservation of fundamental human rights depend on our ability to discern true resistance from oppressive terror.
Opinions expressed by the author are not necessarily the views of Iran International.