EDITORIAL – Bush should speak at Iranian university

President Bush is either stubborn or stupid. Most likely, he’s both.

Following Iranian… President Bush is either stubborn or stupid. Most likely, he’s both.

Following Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit to Columbia University last week, Iran’s Ferdowsi University invited Bush to travel to Iran and speak at the University about issues ranging from the Holocaust and human rights to terrorism and foreign policy, according to the Washington Post.

What was Bush’s response? You guessed it – a stupid, stubborn no.

The White House issued a statement, saying, according to the Washington Post, that “President Bush looks forward to traveling to a democratic Iran, an Iran where its leaders allow freedom of speech and assembly for all of its people and an Iran where the leaders mourn the victims of the Holocaust, not call for the destruction of Israel.”

Sorry, but we’re not convinced.

For one thing, Bush visits undemocratic countries all the time, namely China and Saudi Arabia. So we don’t buy that excuse.

Also, the fact that Iran is an undemocratic country with restricted freedom of speech and press, with countless human rights violations and limited civil liberties actually makes traveling there to give a speech an incredibly positive diplomatic endeavor.

Instead, Bush’s flawed reasoning led him to decline the offer on the basis of Iran’s undemocratic government.

Furthermore, Ferdowsi University’s willingness to provide a forum for Bush greatly undermines that reasoning.

The University’s desire to hear Bush’s views seems to reflect a desire for free speech, even a desire for democracy.

Bush could have encouraged that democracy by speaking directly to the Iranian people. He could have said whatever he wanted to a population of students and faculty who rarely get to hear his side of the story. Why pass up such an incredible opportunity?

The way we see it, there is only one legitimate reason Bush could have to turn down such an offer – that such a visit would destabilize the already fragile relationship the United States has with Iran. But that’s not likely.

Diplomacy never poses such drastically negative effects.

So maybe Bush is scared that he won’t like the students’ questions. Maybe he’s afraid that he won’t know how to answer them, you know, eloquently.

However, nobody said Bush would need to make his speech on Iranian terms.

He could set his own conditions, have his questions filtered and prepare his answers ahead of time.

No big deal. In fact, he practically does that here all the time.

Perhaps he’s fearful that his base supporters – the Bill O’Reillys of the United States who don’t think we should diplomatically have anything to do with Iran – will lose respect for him. On the other hand, Bush would undoubtedly gain respect from Americans who would like to see him exercise a little more international diplomacy and a little less force.

The president has said over and over that Iran is a threat.

By that logic, the smart move would be to get to know the enemy, so that we could better contest them.

Bush has also made it clear, in past State of the Union addresses, that he cares about the Iranian people. “As you stand for your own liberty, America stands with you,” Bush said in 2005.

But his refusal to speak at Ferdowsi University proves otherwise.