IRAN Next?

Ottawa Citizen, July 19, 2002

Iran: The end is nigh

David Warren

Iran has come to the boil. Against the background of huge public demonstrations, the reformist party that controls the largest block of seats in the elected but largely powerless Iranian Parliament on July 18 threatened to walk out, if the ayatollahs continued to stall measures for social and political change.

The party's leader, Reza Khatami (brother of the Iranian president who is now discredited as a reform leader) delivered a rebuke to the tyranny the ayatollahs have imposed. He said their stalling will leave the Iranian people with only two choices: "dictatorship or uprising". He was following in the footsteps of Ayatollah Jalaleddin Taheri, the Imam of Isfahan, who resigned last week in protest against clerical absolutism.

With the deterioration of Iran's political situation, has come a small but significant change in American policy towards the country.

Last Friday afternoon, while the media were checking out for the weekend, the U.S. president, George W. Bush, delivered his most under-reported speech. It was timed to land Friday morning in Iran, Islamic sermon time, and this was part of the intended effect. The White House was delivering a "maximal" affront to Iran's "maximal" Shia fundamentalist regime. The speech deviated from the previous U.S. policy, which had been re-enunciated earlier in the week at a State Department press conference, of having nothing to say about Iranian demonstrations. It was fed to Iran in Persian ("Farsi" to the snobs), by a private, Iranian-exile satellite TV station in Los Angeles.

Mr. Bush weighed in with the demonstrators who had taken to the streets, by the hundred thousand in Teheran, Isfahan, Shiraz, Tabriz, and by the ten thousand in Meshed and elsewhere -- huge events that also went almost unreported in our mainstream media.

Without naming names (as he also had not in his June speech disowning Yasser Arafat), he showed the U.S. no longer makes subtle distinctions between the "moderate reformist" President Mohammad Khatami, and the "hardline" theocratic regime of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei; just as the demonstrators in Iran have ceased to make this subtle distinction, now observed exclusively by the ethereal types in Europe's foreign offices. In the last couple of years it has been clear to everybody else that the two -- Khamenei and Khatami -- are a Mutt and Jeff act, trying to prevent the regime from collapsing.

In every matter of significance, including rhetorical support for Hezbollah terror, Mr. Khatami sides unreservedly with the other ayatollahs. The "reform process" in Iran turns out to be similar to the "peace process" that re-launched Arafat in Oslo: something that takes forever, and moves consistently backwards.

Mr. Khatami's chief use to the regime, now that his value as a lightning rod for civil dissent has expired, is to drive a wedge between the U.S. and its European allies. He provides the carefully groomed face and manners that persuade the Europeans to rescind their trade sanctions and withdraw human rights complaints against the monstrous Iranian regime -- concessions the Bush administration has refused to make. (A European trade mission was prostrating itself before the mullahs even as the demonstrations were gathering.) To the Americans, as now to the vast majority of the Iranians, the regime means gibbering fundamentalist idiots at home, and Hezbollah terrorists abroad.

It is a regime which not only desperately seeks nuclear weapons (the Russians are, under intense U.S. pressure, gradually withdrawing from a project to build a reactor for the ayatollahs at Bushehr); but has publicly declared it would use them to annihilate Israel the moment they were available. It is the principal source of arms for the world's Islamist terrorists; and the power behind a huge buildup in weaponry including medium-range missiles by the Hezbollah in Lebanon (who operate there under Syrian protection. At least twice in the present year, Israel has been on the verge of going to war with Syria, to destroy this growing cache.)

There was a furious response from the Iranian regime to Mr. Bush's speech. (In fact, the only way a reader of most Western newspapers could have learned of the speech, was in reports of this reaction.) The "supreme leader", Ayatollah Khamenei, expressed his outrage at "interference in Iranian affairs", then prattled on about Mr. Bush's legitimacy after the Florida recounts. He was still burbling away yesterday. The supposedly reformist Khatami was actually more vituperative, and demanded a U.S. apology. He has since promiscuously suggested that by discreetly lobbying for better relations with the U.S., the reformist Parliamentarians "act like CIA spies". Since such a charge would carry the death sentence in any Iranian kangaroo court, it was calculated to shut them up. (But as they showed yesterday, they don't shut up.)

What had Mr. Bush said? Among other things, "In Iran today, students are repressed, journalists are jailed, lawmakers are tried and intimated, lawyers arrested, newspapers are closed one after another on charges of advocating reform or criticising the ruling regime while unemployment is mounting, causing the flight of brilliant students, scholars and intellectuals."

A fairly straightforward description of the reality.

"We have seen throughout history the power of one simple idea: when given a choice, people will choose freedom. As we have witnessed over the past few days, the people of Iran want the same freedoms, human rights, and opportunities as people around the world. Their government should listen to their hopes."

Something to shock the ears of European diplomatists, a few of those in his own State Department, and the editorial board of the New York Times.

(The evening after Mr. Bush spoke, police in Teheran arrested, then flogged, 45 young people who had attended a birthday party where there was dancing; a rare item that made it into news briefs in the West.)

The hinge, the turning point, for the Iranian regime, may have been Tuesday last week, when the Imam of Isfahan, Ayatollah Jalaleddin Taheri, quit his job. He was among the most prominent clerics installed by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, in 1979. His courageous and very public defection sent a thrill through the demonstrators all over the country.

Isfahan was, after all, the epicentre of that 1979 revolution, which brought down the Shah.

Ayatollah Taheri's five-page screed against the new tyranny was built around an apology for his own cowardice in failing to speak out before. It included an eloquent defence of Ayatollah Montazeri, the regime's most famous domestic critic, who has been under house arrest for years. In particular, it applauded Montazeri's recent "fatwah" or ruling against the practice of suicide bombing: denouncing this unambiguously as an affront to Islam.

The regime responded immediately, by banning media from reporting Taheri's resignation, and then closing a prominent Teheran newspaper for mentioning it. This hardly prevented the news from spreading.

In a further sign that the regime was losing its grip, it then confined its police to barracks in Isfahan, as it had done the previous day in Teheran -- doubting their loyalty. Instead they sent foreign thugs with paramilitary training, chiefly Palestinian and Iraqi Arabs, and Uzbeks and Tadzhiks from Afghanistan, to beat the demonstrators down. It was a desperate measure -- an implicit acknowledgment that the whole Persian people have now sided with the opposition.

To understand how this could have happened, it is important to realise that almost two-thirds of the Iranian population was not yet born in 1979, when the Shah fell and Ayatollah Khomeini brought the world's first Islamist, terrorist regime to power. And most of his cronies, still in power, are now quite old. Iran's formerly very high birthrate (it has since plummeted) created the mother of all generation gaps. To the students in universities, and other young people coming of age in a time of Internet and satellite TV, the ayatollahs have nothing to say. Their parents, too, are sick to death of living under the Shi'i version of Islamist tyranny; but while their parents were cowed into submission, the kids refuse to sit still.

They have been told all their lives that the United States is the "Great Satan". Therefore they love America. (On the night of 9/11, huge numbers of Iranian students appeared spontaneously in the streets of many Iranian cities, carrying lighted candles to mourn the victims of Al Qaeda in New York and Washington. And there were illicit fireworks displays this year on the 4th of July.)

They have been fed from birth the most extraordinary diet of sick-in-the-head anti-Semitism. So Israel seems pretty cool to them, too.

And they have been taught that Islam -- submission to the will of Allah as interpreted by the ayatollahs -- is the whole meaning and purpose of their lives. So most are intensely secular. Or else they embrace an Islam that is increasingly apolitical, mystical, unworldly.

Lately they have also taken to celebrating Zoroastrianism. I have heard several accounts of police busts of "infidels", presumably converted Muslims practicing ancient Persian rites, or merely studying the Gathas of Zarathustra. Last March the ayatollahs forcefully commanded the public not to observe Norouz, the ancient Persian fire festival and New Year. But throughout the country, according to numerous reports, flower, food, and candy stores were sold out from festive preparations; and there were bonfires and fireworks aplenty at the solstice. And in the middle of Shia Islam's holiest month, the mosques were almost empty each Friday.

Despite the risk of arrest and flogging, the students actually goad the religious authorities, and dare the police -- turning out in such numbers as the police cannot handle. Girls make a point of wearing short skirts to the rallies; boys bring beer; the Stars and Stripes get unfurled, together with the Shah's old royal banner.

The students first, and now every part of Iranian society except the people whose livelihoods depend on the tyranny, demand re-admission to the modern, explicitly Western, world. (Several of the Persians I correspond with have emphasised this point: "We are a Western people. We are not part of the East." )

Yet the majority are also intensely Persian (Iran, more empire than nation, also contains several large minority nationalities). Here is a country that was also a civilisation, that has been at or near the forefront of humane culture for several thousand years, reduced to a thugocracy. Like Italy, Greece, the culture never quite disappears, the pride in ancient -- and pre-Islamic -- accomplishments remains ever available. The Arabs could conquer and Islamicise Iran, but they never succeeded in "Arabising" it. And chiefly Persian-speaking Shi'i Islam long considered itself not merely more legitimate, but more culturally advanced than its chiefly Arabic-speaking Sunni rival: a religion more of the spirit than of the sword.

The question remains: are the mad mullahs finally entering the garbage chute of history? It is the question we asked of the Soviet regime, when the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, and of the Chinese Communists in Tiananmen Square. Neither regime was reformable. The Soviets lost their nerve, and collapsed; the Chinese politburo, red in tooth and claw, massacred and survived. The Bush administration is betting, for the moment, that the unreformable ayatollahs will lose their nerve. But if they do somehow keep it, the U.S. Fifth Fleet is waiting offshore.

David Warren is a Columnist for the Ottawa Citizen.



<b>Damn War! I'm too young to watch other people die!</b>
<A HREF="http://members.iinet.net.au/~lhgpoobaa/images" target="_new">My Images!</A>

fantasitc article, these people are more American than many in my town. I pray that they will have their reforms! If their government will not change then it is our duty as the poster child of democracy, freedom and western thought to help those people out!

Treat your signature like a toothbrush: Don't let anyone else use it, and get a new one every few months.

(pooh here). On the same page i got that they think that israel was on the verge of going to war with syria on a number of occasions too, becuase they were funding and supplying arms to hesbola and the islamic jihad.


<font color=purple><i>Do not go where the path may lead,
go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.
<b>Ralph Waldo Emerson</b></i></font color=purple>

which civillians? US citizens or others?

<b>Damn War! I'm too young to watch other people die!</b>
<A HREF="http://members.iinet.net.au/~lhgpoobaa/images" target="_new">My Images!</A>

The Arabic civilians ofcourse.

My dual-PSU PC is so powerfull that the neighbourhood dims when I turn it on

Look deeper. Obviously we aren't going to attack a country we DON'T have a problem with.

<font color=red>GOD</font color=red> <font color=blue>BLESS</font color=blue> <font color=red>AMERICA</font color=red>

Yawn

The only way France is going in is if we tell them we've discovered truffles in Iraq. -Dennis Miller

<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=faq¬found=1&code=1" target="_new">Here's the post</A>

This should really ring some bells now that we are at war. It's Eden's thread on censorship.

<font color=red>GOD</font color=red> <font color=blue>BLESS</font color=blue> <font color=red>AMERICA</font color=red>

Keep in mind though that this war is only 5 days old and nobody wanted war. Everyone hoped we could avoid this without a fight. So there really wasn't a pro-war side.

Let's see what happens next. Public opinion in the USA is high. We obviously can't expect the French or people like svol to have any sense so there's probably no hope in them being supportive. They prefer Saddam over Bush.

<font color=red>GOD</font color=red> <font color=blue>BLESS</font color=blue> <font color=red>AMERICA</font color=red>

Svol, Syria is holding Lebanon, my home country, in annexing mode, they are assimilating my country and our government does jack. I for one would support fully a US war led in my country to repel these damn soldiers away, and make my country back as one.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden.

For SVOL bump

I aint signing nothing!!!

Yeah I've been there... that interactive exhibit brings up some nice ethical questions.

My dual-PSU PC is so powerfull that the neighbourhood dims when I turn it on

DH doesn't want to discuss with me and he bumps... what a weird guy. But I didn't have any time to post last week due to exams.

My dual-PSU PC is so powerfull that the neighbourhood dims when I turn it on

Doesn't matter Svol, the sooner the USA and its allies remove the SOURCES that cause these civil wars, the sooner we annihilate (or imprison) the extremist groups, the sooner we set stable governments (read: STABLE, not governments set by the US) everywhere, the sooner this world will turn for the better.

Maybe for the first time, the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" quote will be twisted but personally, I cannot stand going to Lebanon and feel surrounded by extremist ass-holes who call Americans cowards when they are actually at war (I mean seriously, that is the biggest joke of an insult those Islamic extremists come up with, so hypocritical in fact).

Like I said, if we remove the sources causing these, and put a government with control and democracy, the less propaganda will be sent from either side, the US or the extremists.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden.

Bush is evil. Saddam is evil. Saddam has committed more crimes against humanity. Root for the less effective of two evils then!

<font color=blue>Watts mean squat if you don't have quality!</font color=blue>

Actually you can't seem to get it through your thick skull that America doesn't even need to be involved in mid-eastern politics outside of Isreal for many mid-easterners to hate us. They hate Isreal. U.S. backs Isreal. Europe does little for Isreal. Therefore they hate us for backing Isreal.

So why do countries outside the middle east hate us? People in Asia hate us because of the muslim brotherhood, if their brother has a problem with us, they should too.

And what about communist countries? Leftovers of the cold war.

What, so you think America should leave Isreal defensless? Europe helped put the Jews in Isreal, maybe Europe should bear that burdon. After all, isn't it Germany who caused the mass migration of Jews to begin with? So handy to blame the Americans for problems the Europeans caused, isn't it?

Basically the whole Islam vs America problem was initiated by the Europeans during WWII. America is their scapegoat, simply because we protect the people YOU put in danger! Did you wish for us to pull support for Isreal, so that the Arabs can finish the holocaust Europe started?

So why should America be the worlds police? It seems that Europeans are far too selfish to be involved. They'd rather suck their oil from the same straw as the U.S. and then blame the U.S. and "our" greed for oil for the problems that occur.

You'd better remove the plank from your own eye before you try to remove the spec from ours, then maybe you could see to remove the spec from ours. Now who said that? Never mind, it was a jew.

<font color=blue>Watts mean squat if you don't have quality!</font color=blue>

I'm really hoping you're not counting Britain in a lot of your statements.

<b><font color=blue>~ <A HREF="http://forums.btvillarin.com/index.php?act=ST&f=41&t=324&s=58e94ba84a16bedfebbf0f416d5bac48" target="_new">Nice sig 81.</A> ~<font color=blue></b>

Still dreaming DH?

My dual-PSU PC is so powerfull that the neighbourhood dims when I turn it on

ROFLMAO!!!

They can't even decide on agriculture. Who told you that one. MWAHAHAHA!!!

<b><font color=blue>~ <A HREF="http://forums.btvillarin.com/index.php?act=ST&f=41&t=324&s=58e94ba84a16bedfebbf0f416d5bac48" target="_new">Nice sig 81.</A> ~<font color=blue></b>

As long as we're discussing Europe's rise to the top, lets discuss how this is going to happen.

How do you propose you create a superpower out of a united Europe with France there?

What about Eastern Europe? Chirac told them to "be quiet" and that they were "badly brought up". Good luck with that one.

What about Yugoslavia? It's only been a ten years since the last episode of genocide in Europe. Hell, Russia would have vetoed any resolution at the UN which is why the NATO had to go in there.

What about your economy?

Racism? Anti-semitism? How do you propose you create a European superpower while at the same time avoiding the pitfalls that Europe always falls into while attempting this?

How do you propose getting all the nations in Europe to unite? Tell me how you're going to get Greece and Turkey to get along. How are you going to fix corruption in Russia? How are you going to "compete against" the USA?

You didn't put any thought into your post did you?

<font color=red>GOD</font color=red> <font color=blue>BLESS</font color=blue> <font color=red>AMERICA</font color=red>

Britain will never truly join in all this EU shite.

Let's face it, all the EU care about is make us buy our stuff in Kg's, rather than lbs. What a wonderful use of resources. Stuff debating real issues like racism and hate crimes, lets pick on Britain becuase some market trader sells Banana's by the lb.

Bunch of arseholes.

<font color=blue>"I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass. And I'm all out of bubblegum" - Roddy Piper</font color=blue>

Let's face it, it's all a load of bollocks isn't it?

<font color=blue>"I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass. And I'm all out of bubblegum" - Roddy Piper</font color=blue>

Job justification at it's very best. Pity all those other former commie states about to join.

Look out, it's the banana police.

<font color=blue>"I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass. And I'm all out of bubblegum" - Roddy Piper</font color=blue>

I wasn't actually thinking of Brittain at all.

You know, Brittain has to be about the most politically moderate country I can think of. I should move there.

<font color=blue>Watts mean squat if you don't have quality!</font color=blue>

Totally agree with you dude. If America did not play police, this whole world would truly be in shambles since the 1940s, and there would've been heck of a lot of extinct races.

Yet we blame the US. I am tempted to say they have the least flaws, but I won't.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden.