Hope Adrift Between War and Tomorrow / Abutalebi: Clarify the Fate of Diplomacy; Society Cannot Remain in Prolonged Limbo

Hamid Abutalebi, adviser to the president in the twelfth administration, wrote in an op-ed for Safir Arjan: «Mehr is the beginning of hope for youth: the start of the academic year, new encounters, books, university, ideas and dreams of the future. But now, as Mehr nears its end, it carries the sorrow of hope in its most sensitive position. A month that should signal a beginning now prompts us, more than anything, to reflect on what has become of the fervor

According to Ambassador Arjan's report, Hamid Abutalebi, a retired diplomat and adviser to the president in the 12th government, wrote: Today, not out of pity, but out of reflection, I visited the bookstores in front of Tehran University; Maybe to recreate the nostalgia of my student days and find myself once again in that special space where books, students, thoughts and the future once met. I wanted to see what was left of those days; From those passionate visits, from young people who went from one bookstore to another with a book under their arm and a question in their mind, as if every book could be a window to a new world.

But this time, what I saw was more saddening than nostalgia.

It is as if there is nothing left of that special environment. Birds don't fly in bookstores; Let alone the enthusiastic presence of people and the dynamic of knowledge and the future. Some bookstores have changed and given their place to cafes and other spaces. Of course, the cafe is not bad, and city life without a cafe has no meaning; But the problem is something else: when the bookstore, which was once a meeting place of youth and wisdom and questions about the future, goes out of business, you have to ask yourself what happened to that future that no one comes to books to find it anymore.

For me, the front of Tehran University is not just a city address. It is part of the intellectual and social memory of several generations; Where being a student, reading books, thinking and looking ahead were the components of a single life. During my student years, I have lived the same experience in other places; Including in Paris, outside the Sorbonne University, where reflection on thought and the world was a natural part of student life. The university, bookstore, cafe, and street were somehow connected to each other and connected youth, thought, and the future in a living space.

Now, if there is no news of that young generation of students; If there is no one here looking for books, hope, knowledge and the future; If the front of Tehran University no longer has that lively atmosphere that we once experienced; And if that passion for intellectual search that was seen here and around the Sorbonne has faded, one must ask: where is it still as it should be?

The main reason for this transformation is not the subject of this article. We can talk about livelihood, economy, politics, technology, lifestyle change, immigration, cultural changes and dozens of other factors. Each of these factors explains a part of reality. But I am not going to explain all these reasons now. What stopped me today is "the sign itself":

The passion of a student that is no longer visible, a book that is rarely shared, and the hope that is no longer manifested in the public space like before. My problem is the wandering of hope in a time when the future is not clear.

Perhaps society can be analyzed from many aspects; with economic, political, security and social indicators. But no society lives with these indicators alone. Society also needs a "horizon"; With the feeling that one knows that tomorrow, although difficult and difficult, is imaginable and one can plan for it. Man does not live only with today's security; It also lives with the meaning of tomorrow.

Because hope is not a mere individual feeling; It is also a social phenomenon. A society whose young people see a conceivable future invests in building it. He reads books, learns, starts a business, builds a house, starts a family and plans for the next years. But when the future is constantly in the aura of uncertainty, life also gradually becomes short-lived. The question is not just whether people are afraid of war or not; The problem is that they do not know how long this situation will continue. They do not know what condition they will be in tomorrow. They don't know whether they should prepare for peace or for war; plan for stability or for crisis; Build the future or wait.

In such a situation, hope wanders before it is destroyed.

And maybe this is what can be felt today in the privacy of the bookstores around the university more than anywhere else: a young man who should be a questioner, but for him, the question of the future has become a question of the possibility of the future.

that October should be the beginning of excitement; The beginning of the book, university, friendship, knowledge and dreams of tomorrow. But if October also carries with it the unanswered question of the future, the sadness of hope is no longer just an individual feeling; It becomes a social experience.

war and tomorrow; Society in a state of suspension

This is where the issue of war goes beyond a purely military and diplomatic issue and becomes a social and even philosophical issue. Living in the gap between the expectation of war and the expectation of peace creates a different situation: neither the war has ended nor the peace has begun; Society cannot confidently return to normal life, nor can it prepare itself for a final state.

This "waiting in the middle of war" is not just a political situation; It is a social situation. A society that lives in such suspense for a long time will gradually pay a price that is not easily seen in the statistics of war and peace: "Erosion of the future horizon".

War endangers life; But uncertainty makes life wait. And the long wait, if its end is not known, can itself become a kind of social erosion. Decisions are delayed, plans become short-term, investments in the future become more difficult, and people wait to see what will happen rather than build their lives.

From this point of view, what we see in a quiet bookstore may not be the only silence of a bookstore. It may be a sign of a society that has lost part of its ability to imagine the future.

In such a situation, diplomacy is no longer a luxury or marginal affair. Diplomacy, in any political situation, is one of the main means of protecting national interests; Whether the country is at peace, in crisis or on the verge of war.

But in today's Iran, the conflict in the narratives related to diplomacy has also become a part of the problem: on the one hand, it is said that "we are investigating and preparing an answer" and on the other hand, it is said that "we are waiting for America's answer". Regardless of which narrative is ultimately more accurate, this duality creates a fundamental question at the level of public opinion:

This is not just a difference in words. When society does not know where the path of dialogue is, who is the initiator of the next stage, and what is the next stage at all, political uncertainty turns into social uncertainty.

This is the "defenseless city"; A city that does not necessarily lack power, but lacks a clear picture of how to use its power tools. A city where diplomacy, instead of clarifying the path of communication and crisis management, itself has become a vague and wandering issue.

Diplomacy does not necessarily mean agreement; Just as dialogue does not necessarily mean accepting the other party's wishes. Diplomacy means maintaining the possibility of speaking, even when the difference is deep. It means turning part of power into possibility, and turning part of conflict into arrangements that can prevent unnecessary expenses.

A country that denies the possibility of dialogue also loses part of the crisis management tools. And a country that has diplomacy but does not give a clear picture to the society about its path, purpose and responsibility, unintentionally conveys a part of the same confusion to the society.

It's not just about what diplomacy does; The question is, does society know what diplomacy is doing?

The problem is ultimately simpler and at the same time more fundamental than we sometimes imagine. If diplomacy is not necessary for the country, this issue should be clearly defined and the duties of its institutions should be clarified. But if diplomacy is still one of the necessary tools for securing national interests and crisis management, it cannot be kept in a vague, contradictory and abandoned state. It is impossible to consider diplomacy as necessary and make it such a taboo that it is difficult or even forbidden to talk about it.

To get out of the state of suspension, the country first of all needs to clarify its relationship with the future. War and peace are not the only two military situations; They are two different situations for social life. And between these two, society cannot remain suspended for long. Because perhaps what needs to be reformed more than anything today is not just a policy or an institution, but the horizon of the future.

Because hope survives when the future can be imagined again.

And maybe this is where you should go back to the quiet bookstores in front of the university; In the same place where once upon a time youth, books and knowledge sat side by side without anyone writing instructions for them.