It goes without saying that world leaders must be held accountable for their contraventions of international law. Any leader with a poor human rights record or any leader who illegally develops nuclear weapons must be condemned—loudly, publicly, and persistently.

Yet in the United States and here at Harvard, these supposedly obvious democratic principles are often overlooked in favor of political expediency and the sanctity of the party line. The recent visit of former Iranian President Sayyid Muhammad Khatami could not have highlighted this point more clearly, providing a sterling example of the malleable standards by which we judge some leaders but not others.

To give some context to Khatami’s visit, it is important to step back in history to September 2002. Back then, General Pervez Musharraf, president of Pakistan, came to speak at the Institute of Politics under what administrators described as the tightest ever security provided.

The highlight of Musharraf’s visit arose courtesy of President Lawrence H. Summers’ enthusiastic remarks. As the Harvard Gazette reported, Summers introduced the president, saying that the University’s cooperation with Pakistan reached back to the country’s inception in 1947, concluding that Musharraf’s presence illustrated the vibrancy of the Kennedy School.

What it was not, of course, was a sign of the vitality of Pakistan’s democracy, for there was none. President Musharraf was, and still is, a military dictator. “Our dictator,” to be sure, but a dictator nonetheless.

When Musharraf took the podium, it was to deliver a relatively uncontroversial speech supporting President Bush’s “war on terror,” while lamenting the diplomatic difficulties of Pakistan’s border disputes with India. Somehow the good general forgot to talk about honor killings, Pakistan’s development and sale of nuclear weapons, or his country’s terrorist attacks on India.

Four years later, another president was due to visit the Kennedy School, this time the twice-elected former president of Iran, Khatami. Unlike Musharraf, Khatami endured attack and abuse from the outset.

First, Massachusetts Governor W. Mitt Romney, said he would not allow state resources to be used to protect the former president. Romney, although providing no evidence, cited Khatami’s role in terrorism and his human rights record as justification for the decision, telling The Boston Globe that “there are people in this state who have suffered from terrorism, and taking even a dollar of their money to support a terrorist is unacceptable.” Apparently the types of terrorism and human rights abuses manifested in Pakistan differ from those in Iran.

Then the Harvard College Democrats presented five seemingly reasonable demands, calling for Khatami to admit his alleged role in multiple human rights abuses and to distance himself from the views of current President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The Dems also protested in front of the Kennedy School. Their leader, Eric P. Lesser ’07, told CNN.com, “His speech is on ethics and violence. It would be very bizarre if he came here to speak on ethics and violence and did not acknowledge and discuss his own record in Iran.” While holding Khatami to these standards is laudable, would the Dems treat the next visiting Democrat with the same cynical hospitality?

Next to cross campus e-mail lists was a lengthy “white paper” from the Harvard Republican Club (HRC) President Stephen Dewey. The HRC called for its members and “all sensible people of the Harvard community” to condemn Khatami’s role in the Iranian nuclear project and his “distorted and dangerous international views.” No doubt they were simultaneously writing to Musharraf and Israel about their nuclear weapons.

To be fair, the group did make mention of Khatami’s attempts at reform, rightfully highlighting how these efforts were often undermined by the unelected Guardian Council. But throughout the week of Khatami’s visit, all too many people and organizations demonstrated a blind acceptance of the Bush administration’s media barrage, which unrelentingly accuses Iran as the embodiment of pure evil. Apparently, the Republicans were overcome by crippling amnesia.

Evidently, the HRC forgot Khatami’s efforts to fully normalize relations with the United States just three years ago. In fact, in May 2003, according to Flynt Leverett, a former official in Bush’s National Security Council, Khatami proposed “an agenda for a diplomatic process that was intended to resolve on a comprehensive basis all of the bilateral differences between the United States and Iran.” How the HRC overlooked the proposal is anyone’s guess, but the extent of their hypocrisy in light of Khatami’s offer is mind-blowing.

Of course, none of this is to say that Khatami should go without criticism. His views on homosexuality are disgraceful, but neither is vitriolic hatred of gays unseen nor unheard in America. Presiding over a government guilty of human rights abuses is also Khatami’s responsibility, and one he should not be allowed to escape under any circumstances.

But if Governor Romney, the Harvard Dems, the HRC, or any of the scores of journalists on the same bandwagon are prepared to take Khatami to task for his wrongdoings, let us see the same pursuit of all who commit human rights abuses, attack gays, or break international law. In a liberal democracy we should be careful to tar all those who need it with the same brush, no exceptions.



Bede A. Moore ’06-’07 is a history concentrator in Winthrop House. His column appears on alternate Tuesdays.