"And they said if we help with the crisis, they would do a lot of positive acts. After we helped in those crises, they showed negative acts and the Japanese and Turks were ashamed"
About this Quote
A transactional gripe dressed up as moral indictment, Rafsanjani is doing what seasoned power-brokers do best: turning a grievance into a narrative of betrayal. The language is tellingly vague - "they", "the crisis", "positive acts", "negative acts" - because precision would invite argument, while ambiguity invites alignment. The quote isn’t trying to litigate a single event; it’s trying to cement a pattern in the listener’s mind: we helped, they promised, they reneged, others even felt shame.
As a politician formed by revolution and realpolitik, Rafsanjani is signaling two audiences at once. Domestically, he’s validating a deeply familiar Iranian suspicion that engagement with major powers (implicitly the US and its allies) is a rigged game. The point is less policy detail than emotional bookkeeping: Iran paid in cooperation and got repaid with hostility, sanctions, or humiliation. That framing inoculates the speaker against charges of naivete and makes future hardline postures look like prudence, not belligerence.
Internationally, the invocation of "Japanese and Turks" is a subtle reputational weapon. By pulling in third parties as purported witnesses to "shame", Rafsanjani widens the indictment beyond a bilateral spat and implies a global jury. It’s also a pressure tactic: if even pragmatist states feel embarrassed by Western behavior, then Iran’s distrust becomes not ideological but reasonable.
The intent, ultimately, is leverage. Betrayal isn’t just a complaint here; it’s a justification for recalibrating terms, raising the price of cooperation, and recasting Iran as the aggrieved adult in a room of bad-faith actors.
As a politician formed by revolution and realpolitik, Rafsanjani is signaling two audiences at once. Domestically, he’s validating a deeply familiar Iranian suspicion that engagement with major powers (implicitly the US and its allies) is a rigged game. The point is less policy detail than emotional bookkeeping: Iran paid in cooperation and got repaid with hostility, sanctions, or humiliation. That framing inoculates the speaker against charges of naivete and makes future hardline postures look like prudence, not belligerence.
Internationally, the invocation of "Japanese and Turks" is a subtle reputational weapon. By pulling in third parties as purported witnesses to "shame", Rafsanjani widens the indictment beyond a bilateral spat and implies a global jury. It’s also a pressure tactic: if even pragmatist states feel embarrassed by Western behavior, then Iran’s distrust becomes not ideological but reasonable.
The intent, ultimately, is leverage. Betrayal isn’t just a complaint here; it’s a justification for recalibrating terms, raising the price of cooperation, and recasting Iran as the aggrieved adult in a room of bad-faith actors.
Quote Details
| Topic | Betrayal |
|---|
More Quotes by Akbar
Add to List
