Those of you who take the time to read Meir Javedanfar’s post on this site may be as surprised as I was to find that the best way to understand Iran and Iranians is by reading official web sites and the “polls” in which they invite their readers to participate. This method leads him to conclude that President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nezhad is not nearly as popular as he once was, a discovery that the Italians call “the discovery of the umbrella,” namely something everybody already knew. You didn’t need to read “Baztab” to realize that the increasing misery of the Iranian people (think gasoline rationing), the relentless terror campaign against anyone who speaks out against the daily unconstitutional violations of human rights (of late, large numbers of workers or women), combined with the ongoing self-indulgence and corruption of the leaders of the regime, have alienated most Iranians. We knew all about the massive popular contempt for the regime years ago, during the presidency of the phony “moderate” Mohammed Khatami.
Mr. Javedanfar would have us believe that Ahmadi-Nezhad was brought to power in an election like any other: candidates run, people vote, the winner wins. Indeed, on his account, Ahmadi-Nezhad was permitted to remain on the ballot because he did well on a public opinion poll a few days earlier. But almost every other candidate in the presidential election publicly announced that the whole thing was a sham. As usual, the electoral results were handed down from on high. The choice of Ahmadi-Nezhad reflected a political decision by the Supreme Leader (there is a good reason for that title), not the people’s voice.
But the real problem with Mr. Javedanfar’s discussion of the state of the Islamic Republic of Iran is his policy recommendations, which can best be described as feckless. Yes, he says, the president is not popular, but
.
..the West must not think that it has a blank to check to do what it wants in Iran. Every time the words “regime change” are uttered by neocons in Washington the extremists score political loyalty points.
I’m not entirely sure what “political loyalty points” may be. Apparently the point is that if we were to call for regime change in Iran, there would be a popular backlash on behalf of the regime. Really? So if I were to criticize Ahmadi-Nezhad and call for a freely elected government, that would actually strengthen him and his cohorts? Talk about a dim view of the Iranian people! On Mr. Javedanfar’s account, they have to wait to read the neocon blogs before they know if they should support the regime, or protest its evils.
So what are we supposed to do? If calling for regime change is out, should we just wait, and hope for the best? Not at all, according to Mr. Javedanfar. We should go to that tower of strength, the United Nations.
The UN may seem toothless from the perspective of Washington. But it is one of the most useful and powerful organizations for tackling extremists in Iran due to its international composition, and the very fact that Iran itself is a member. Such legitimacy strikes fear in the heart of Ahmadinejad’s government like no other foreign organization can.
Well, for starters it seems likely that the U.S. Marine Corps strikes considerably more fear in the dark heart of the mullahs than does the U.N. (not that I want the Marines marching on Tehran, as readers of this blog are well aware). And for seconds, I would be pleased to be made aware of a recent case in which the U.N. brought freedom to an oppressed country. So far as I can tell, the U.N. honors and appeases tyrants, and leaves oppressed peoples to their doom.
Mr. Javedanfar’s plea that America abandon the Iranian people meshes nicely with a similar piece by Michael Hirsh in Newsweek (enthusiastically reprinted by Baztab, the Iranian web site that conducted the “poll” that Mr. Javedanfar referred to). Mr. Hirsh spent some time in Tehran, and finds the population quiescent (”After years of turmoil, including mass street protests against the regime in the 1990s, the revolution has adapted. Among the public, political apathy now reigns). Thus, on Mr. Hirsh’s account, active political opposition to Islamic rule is all but gone., the women very beautiful and largely free to dress seductively, and the regime quite subtle in its treatment of its citizens.
Like Mr. Javedanfar, Mr. Hirsh suggests that the American Government give up any hope of fostering regime change in Iran.
From the evidence in the streets of Tehran, there is no indication that this is a government or a political system that’s ripe for overturning. In fact most Iranians—government officials and opposition figures alike—tend to poke fun at the Bush democracy program. “If the Americans are willing to spend their budget inside [Iran] for the purpose they are pursuing, they should just give the money to us directly,” Ali Larijani, the chairman of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, told NEWSWEEK with a laugh. “They are just distributing it through the wrong channels.”
It’s perhaps a tribute to the canons of modern journalism that a paragraph could claim that “most Iranians” believe something, and then citing a single source–indeed a most unreliable source, since Larijani is one of the most infamous killers in the country, and thus a man with a lot to lose if the regime comes down–as proof of the generalization. It’s rather like interviewing a top KGB officer about the effectiveness of Reagan’s support for democracy in the Soviet Union. And as for the “apathy” of the Iranians, that is at best uninformed, and quite possibly deceptive. To put the best interpretation in it, apparently nobody told Mr. Hirsh about the huge demonstrations–tens of thousands of people, across the entire country–of Iranian teachers. And he seems not to have noticed that at least two people have been stoned to death recently (not very subtle, in my view), or that considerable numbers of political prisoners have been hung, or that the Ahwaz Arabs are being forcibly moved out of their homeland, or that scores of women have been rounded up, lashed, and imprisoned for collecting signatures on a petition that simply restates their rights contained in the national Constitution.
Finally, it is both immoral and strategically self-defeating to walk away from support of the Iranian people against this evil regime. The Islamic Republic has been at war with us for nearly three decades, and is actively killing Americans, Afghans, Iraqis, and Coalition Forces soldiers today. People like Messrs. Hirsh and Javedanfar would have us shrug our shoulders and do nothing, as if it were not our problem, or as if the Iranians did not want to be free.
It’s an pleasant truth that there is no escape for us from the war the Islamic Republic is waging against us. Some fine day we will decide to respond in kind, by challenging the mullahs and supporting their suffering people.
Digg This
del.icio.us
PJM Home
14 Comments
Alireza:Dr. Ledeen, terms like “regime change”, regardless of how much I hate Iranian regime, it is so insulting to Iranian people, and no matter how bad is Iranian government. And more insulting is setting the price of $75 million as the down payment, courtesy of U.S. Congress.
When advertising “regime change” in Iran, to Iranians, it is like we ourselves are so helpless, DESPERATE and INCAPABLE that U.S. from all the way from North America should come here and free people of Iran from bondage that they themselves created this mess just 30 years ago. Many Iranians are shamed in front of their children that they were the reason to bring this regime to power.
So When Mr. Bolton just keep saying regime change in Iran, I get a feeling that Ahmadinejad just want to fly to U.S. and kiss his lips for keep saying this!! Because as more this “regime change” keeps coming up, it is like giving life to Ahmadinejad.
That is why I deeply suspect that keep repeating this “regime change” vs. talking and raising substance issues about Iranian system.
I know many Iranians who are AGAINST this regime, but many of them made sure to vote for Khatami. Why? Because they knew revolution is no longer the way to go forward. Change must come slowly. So wanting to change in phases is not bad.
Dr. Ledeen you said: “So if I were to criticize Ahmadi-Nezhad and call for a freely elected government, that would actually strengthen him and his cohorts?”
My response is: No. if you ask and challenge that free election in Iran must be guaranteed and provided, this is does not equate “regime change”. There is a Persian proverb that says some people are so smart that they can cut someone’s head with cotton/silk that they don’t feel the pain. Keep saying “regime change” is like announcing a week before cutting someone’s head with a knife!
I once read that revolution does not happen every 10, 20 or 30 years. And making regime change in Iran is something that requires a revolution. And revolution is bloody and so many Iranian have seen it and they are just tired of it. Yet, 99% of people support gradual change and more change and more change. Thus far, I believe Iranian people have won. How?
This very regime wanted to kill Iranian new years and they failed. Majority of Iranians hate Iranian flag that no longer has the lion and sun in the middle of it. Now there are rumors that they might bring back this very old symbol back to the parliament main entrance. This regime wanted to kill pre Islamic Iran and they failed so badly. And so many other things.
It is Iranian people who have gradually changed this oppressive regime to this point. Are we done! We still have another 90% to go.
So we could do so many things that equate “regime change”, but not keep mentioning it.
ML:
As you do so often, Alireza, you are simultaneously apologizing for the regime, and accusing the American Government of something it has never done. No American president or secretary of state or any other high official has EVER called for regime change in Iran. Can we start there?
Jul 14, 2007 - 11:32 pm Alireza:Dr. Ledeen,
I’m speechless! You are accusing me of “apologizing for the regime”! I’m out of breath! Please tell me what exactly I said that equates “apologizing for the regime”!
As far as “…No American president or secretary of state or any other high official has EVER called for regime change in Iran” … except people like Mr. Bolton plus the $75 million for fertilizing democracy in Iran.
And not to mention AEI influence on the administration, including U.S. VP. Come on Dr. Ledeen, you are now under estimating your influence.
ML:
Bolton is a former official. I have not had a single conversation with the VP in all these years, nor do I have any reason to think that anyone in the White House pays the slightest attention to anything I say or write. You really must try to ask questions before you deliver your opinions, Alireza. And as for the $75 million, so far as I know not a penny of it has gone to anyone in Iran, or for that matter to Iranian-American organizations. It goes to American scholars and the like, who have websites and write books and produce videos.
And of course you’re the opposite of speechless, heh.
Jul 14, 2007 - 11:58 pm Winston:One wonders if PJM is trying to be another Media outlet… how sad!
ML:
Of course it is, and that’s a good thing. Aren’t you trying, too? I thought that was why we are all here.
Jul 15, 2007 - 1:41 am DaMav:@ Ledeen
Well that’s a relief. When I first read Javedanfar’s article I thought Pajamasmedia had been taken over by some jihadist disinformation source. And my comment there a few hours ago reflects that disbelief.
Thank you for the refutation of this nonsense. My faith in PJM is at least slightly restored.
ML:
All is well, the doctor is IN, as Lucy used to say.
Jul 15, 2007 - 6:18 pm Winston:Well, becoming MSM like with regards to Iran is not what we are trying to be. Right? Are we not trying to counter what MSM say about Iran? If yes, then why did PJM let Javedanfar voice his jihadi opinion here? Dont these people have CNN, BBC or CBS? I thought PJM is with us.
Jul 15, 2007 - 9:02 pm Brian H:Alireza;
Regardless of your painful embarrassment at being suckered by the Mullahs and their puppets, the fact is that the tyranny is able to mount sufficient force, so far, to keep the Iranian population from freeing itself.
Avoiding embarrassment should be the least of your concerns. I find your attitude and writing pathetic.
Jul 15, 2007 - 10:03 pm Alireza:Brian H., I’m sure you were one of those VISIONARY, SMART, and TALENTED people who also thought Iraq will turn into Japan and people will insist on having U.S. presidents as their own and they demand they no longer want to speak Arabic and make English as their first language!!!!! Like when the VP said people throw flowers at American soldiers… Oh Yeh!!!
And now, you and your type that have SHOWN how some wacky idea could cause this much shocking LOSS, humiliation and benefits to the very regime you and like you thought will be free too! Come on… And then you call my points “pathetic”?
You see, as long as you and like you believe that democracy and freedom come through injection of steroid into countries, while pursuing other hidden agenda, no wonder the whole thing looks like this today—pathetic.
Now, how timely that AFTER I wrote my points here, SF Chronicle just came out with this article about what other Iranians thinks. Educate yourself and read it. Link is:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/07/15/CMGLNQPM671.DTL
Jul 16, 2007 - 1:02 pm Banafsheh:Alireza, you ARE apologizing for the Iranian regime. My father who is a journalist is a political prisoner in Iran and as a result of my activities and outspokenness all kinds of people from inside Iran reach out to me…from workers groups to students, women, and so on and not a single person says what you are claiming. You are talking the propaganda line of the Rafsanjani/Khatami/fako-reformists. You sound like THE typical Iranian exile who does not lift a finger and who is highly influenced by the big lie machinery of the so-called liberal left. You talk about Iran in ways that are entirely irrelevant to the people of Iran, our history, socio-political history and ethnic interaction. Let me just say that people like you sell out their history and heritage in order to appeal to non-Iranians with ideological agendas. EVEN, if you visit Iran once in a while, you still do not have to deal with the real issues that the people inside Iran have to face on a daily basis. Stop reacting emotionally and responding with your heart, learn for a change to deal with facts and think with you BRAIN.
Jul 17, 2007 - 3:15 pm Banafsheh:Alireza, you ARE apologizing for the Iranian regime. My father who is a journalist is a political prisoner in Iran and as a result of my activities and outspokenness all kinds of people from inside Iran reach out to me…from workers groups to students, women, and so on and not a single person says what you are claiming. You are talking the propaganda line of the Rafsanjani/Khatami/fako-reformists. You sound like THE typical Iranian exile who does not lift a finger and who is highly influenced by the big lie machinery of the so-called liberal left. You talk about Iran in ways that are entirely irrelevant to the people of Iran, our heritage, socio-political history and our cultural development. Let me just say that people like you sell out their national identity in order to appeal to non-Iranians with ideological agendas because it’s easier that way.
Jul 17, 2007 - 3:18 pm Winston:EVEN, if you visit Iran once in a while, you still do not have to deal with the real issues that the people inside Iran have to face on a daily basis, so STOP reacting emotionally and responding with your heart, learn for a change to deal with facts and think with you BRAIN.
“Now, how timely that AFTER I wrote my points here, SF Chronicle just came out with this article about what other Iranians thinks”…
Alireza, I am an Iranian too. You dont speak for me. Speak for yourself plz.
Jul 17, 2007 - 6:54 pm Azad Andish - Tehran:Alireza,
I live in Iran and I hate the regime and I have not voted in the last 28 years in this country.
How do you conclude that :
“Yet, 99% of people support gradual change and more change and more change”?
According to the official figures in the last 5 presidential elections out of those who were legible to vote only between 60 to 67 have voted and about 33 to 40 have boycotted elections.
You appreciate that the figures presented by mullahs do not reflect the real picture of what has happened in the elections.I mean I suspect the figures 60 to 67pct of but even if we accept that it means that 33 to 40 pct do not believe in gradual changes at all because if they did they must have voted in favor of Khatami and his friends who are “reformists”. These 33 to 40pct BELIEVE THAT THIS REGIME DOES NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY NOR IS INCLINED TO CHANGE ITS PRACTICES OR BEHAVIOUR AT ALL.
And this is what has been established during the past 28 years. European leaders have always been speaking about ” constructive dialogues” with mullahs and yet the stoning is there. The reason that the regime has remained the same barbaric brutal entity it was is that they are sure the West does not mean what they say. They know Europe does not sacrifice hundreds of billions of dollars they have made in mullah’s Iran for support of democracy.
I don’t get insulted when someone in the US or elsewhere says the regime must change. On the contrary I get the feeling that unlike those bastard European politicians who support mullahs for a handful of dollars someone in the world can understand that there is no way that mullahs change their barbaric practices or views AT ALL.
I get insulted though when Robin Cook and De Vilpin say IRAN IS A DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY ! I get insulted when I see Jack Straw and his counterparts in Germany and France
deliberately try to provide the golden time needed by mullahs to complete their nuclear project to them by sticking to useless-forever-lasting negotiations. I get insulted when I see Clinton is proposing to bestow the Middle East to mullahs in Great Deal in return for nothing and yet the idea is rejected by mullahs.
I get insulted when it is decided in the UN that there is no more periodical surveys of human rights conditions in Iran.
I get insulted when even that 75 million dollars is given to VOA and RADIO FARDA who are supporting mullahs like their big brother BBC.
I get insulted when I see the lobby for the mullahs in the US is so powerful.
Jul 18, 2007 - 12:02 am Ira Zad:As someone who has known Iran and Iranian people for a long time, Ledeen’s reply above cannot be truer.
The facts are that there is no “half way” about confronting and destroying a Theocratic Islamic Fascist regime than to deal with them Head-on, and with lots of force backing you.
The Iranian people are a curious bunch, they may not “appear” that they are ready for another revolution, but what they desire inside is to get rid of this regime. But the fact is they cannot do it alone, they need help, lots of help form the west and in particular US.
That is why, despite what the regime apologizers in US and Europe advertise that the words “regime change” actually strengthens the Tehran regime, I say we have not been strong enough in our reactions so far. That is to say, the longer the current, prevailing US policy of “Pussy Footing” around regime chaneg in Iran continues, the stronger the mullahs will get.
But the regime apologizers/pundits in the western media, like Vali Nasr, Reza Takyeh,Amir Mirahmadi, Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich, etc. spin this fact backward since they are missioned to do so.
Jul 18, 2007 - 10:01 pm Thomas Paine:Ledeen shows a phenomenal lack of strategic insight with regards to dealing with Iran. Indeed, with his reputed global experience working the margins of U.S. policy, it’s amazing to read his repeated ad infinitum ad nauseum shrill calls for Iranian regime change. Being myself a former U.N. nuclear inspector, and at the forefront of U.S. counterproliferation efforts in several 3rd-world nations since the early 1990’s, I find it astounding to read here the need to overthrow the Tehran Mullahs. America already has a bad rap in Iran - they have long memories in the mid-East - for plotting the coup to depose democratically elected Iranian PM Mohammed Mossadeq. Which in a form of ‘blowback’ led to the puppet-Shah’s brutality thus leading to Khomeini, eventually to what we see now in the great Sunni-Shia struggle for Iraq. On that note, to show how misguided Ledeen is, instead of rolling back Iran’s policy of exporting Shia revolution, instead we see U.S. troops fighting Sunnis while the Shia’s rest, regroup, and plot strategy.
And thus, we see the current U.S. political crisis, replete with nearly monthly documentaries from Hollywood on some variation of the “March to War”, etc. And we see CIA agents ‘outed’, we see Rabbi Chertoff proclaiming the defeat of al-Qaeda but admonishing Americans to be ever more vigilant because now there is an even more dangerous enemy coming for us - Hezbollah. Which on that note, gives away the true source of the ideology of Ledeen-Rabbi Chertoff-Ariel Cohen’Ph.D’, Feith, et.al, - the Likud and Knesset.
Were we to politically neutralize the above listed cabal and their shadowy cohorts, America would see the folly of continued Iran-bashing. For one thing, in 2003 Iran made conciliatory gestures to the US, which we rebuffed, despiste Iran’s offer to reign in Hezbollah and turn it into a mere political party.
The correct policy for Iran would be to re-engage them diplomatically,allow them to continue their peaceful nuclear enrichment program to fuel their Bushehr reactor, and possibly expand their nuclear power program to free up oil for export to alleviate current world overpricing. At the very least, the Iranians may even share their centrifuge technology with us, since America cannot see to get a viable centrifuge enrichment plant up and running despite ca. 15 years of trying. Another thing Ledeen and Co. need to realize, is continual antagonism of the Islamic radicals may indeed lead to WMD attacks on the U.S. America cannot stop any given 50 kg shipment of cocaine or marijuana from being smuggled in, and thus we won’t be able to stop the requisite 50 kg of high enriched uranium in. So with that FACT in mind, the best policy is peaceful engagement with Iran. Two of Ledeen’s ideas I will agree on though: 1) we are warlike, my ancestor participated in bayoneting surrendered Tories after King’s Mountain during the American Revolution, and another participated in the ‘Saltville Massacre’ during the Civil War, in which surrendered Union and Black troops were dragged out of the post-battle hospitals and bayoneted (warlike yet frugal, why waste bullets when you can bayonet the surrendered?) And I’m proud of that ruthless heritage, the sort of ruthlessness I see evident in Hezbollah. Arguably now the world’s most effective fighting force. Even my pals from the IDF - the hardcore commando types who enjoy mountain climbing in Colombia during their vacations - speak with a degree of trepidation about having to face off against Hezbollah again. July 2006 set them to wondering about their supposed invincibility, having been stalemated by ca. 2000 fighters with inferior weaponry. Which in summary, is why Rabbi Chertoff is ginning up the anti-Hezbollah propaganda, time to send in the Rangers and Seals for another Lebanese misadventure as thought 1983 didn’t teach us a lesson.
Mazeltov & Shalom,
The Patriots
ML:
I wonder why you posted this as a comment to an article published a year ago. Did you realize that?
Jun 11, 2008 - 11:01 pm Thomas Paine:Another thing Ledeen, whether or not you publish our post, it’s really meant as a shot across the bow of your cabal’s sinking ship of failed neo-con chickenhawk policy, the new breed of American Patriot is armed with 150+ IQ’s, global boots-on-the-ground experience, and a longstanding (Since 1600s-1700s) legacy of ‘warlike’ service in establishing and safeguarding the American Democratic Republic, and we have no dual citizens in our organization.
Jun 11, 2008 - 11:12 pmp.s. Your Marine son in Iraq, please keep us posted on his PTSD struggles…