Now, that's a gross oversimplification. Those nations have formed and broken alliances with each other many, many times over the centuries, whenever it was in their strategic interest to do so. You don't need "ethical maturity" to recognize that having allies against a common threat is a good idea. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" is an ancient concept. That's a rather irresponsible generalization. Of course the people that a given culture are adversarial toward are going to see them as aggressive and xenophobic. The people of Iraq probably see Americans as aggressive and xenophobic, and plenty of Native Americans or surviving indigenous Hawai'ians would say that those have been American traits throughout our history. But that's not all we are. No culture is exclusively defined by a single attitude. Besides, you're making a huge leap to conclusions in assuming that a common currency is proof of any kind of shift in values or attitudes. Like the Pact itself, it's something they chose to do so that they would be strong and competitive in the face of opposition. We still don't know that the Tzenkethi started the war. You're assuming facts not in evidence. And the Iranian revolutionaries who took American hostages in 1979 were certainly aware that it could lead to war. Oh, come on, it's not a racial thing. You're stereotyping and making kneejerk assumptions without bothering to learn the facts. The Iranian government's problem is with secular states, and with good reason. The Shahs of Iran in the mid-20th century were secular rulers who brutally oppressed their people and whose corruption impoverished the nation. And yet America backed them because they were allies against the Soviets. In the '60s, when the Shah was unseated by a populist reform movement, the CIA overthrew the reformist democratic leader and put the brutal, corrupt autocrat back in power, betraying our own core principles in the name of geopolitical expediency. The Iranians have good reason to see America as a threat, and it's got nothing to do with being "occidental." "All their canonical contacts with the Federation" means "Arena." Period. Their only other canon appearance was in "In a Mirror, Darkly," and that was not a contact with the Federation. All we know about the canonical Gorn is that they fought back forcefully against a perceived invasion. We would do the same. And in the context of The Gorn Crisis, it wasn't the entire military caste that started the war, but a radical faction within it. You're making unjust blanket generalizations.