Iran, the Greens, and the ex-Bushman: With Washington Friends Like These, Who Needs....?

Staff and readers of EA have had a full and frank discussion in recent weeks on the Green Movement and how it is viewed by the US. It's helpful to get a timely reminder today that, while that discussion might have been heated at points, at least it has been amongst people who have had a long-standing interest in reform in Iran, rather than a Johnny-come-lately, ill-informed claim of friendship for the movement.

Step up, Mr Michael Gerson, former speechwriter for George W Bush, current colunnist for The Washington Post. On the surface, one might think that Gerson's claim, "President Obama has seemed to view Iran's ongoing democratic uprising as a pesky obstacle to engagement", might be a genuine expression of concern that the US Government is not doing enough to back calls for rights, justice, and political fairness.

Iran: How Washington Views the Green Opposition — The Next Chapter
The Latest from Iran (3 December): Normal Service?

Keep reading --- and do so with a bit of historical memory.

For Mr Gerson's simple view is that Iran has been on a one-way path for 30 years: "We are seeing the consolidation of a military dictatorship. Since the Iranian revolution of 1979, the nation's clerical leaders have had a military arm -- the Revolutionary Guard Corps -- that has acted as their ideological enforcers."

One might forgive Mr Gerson for his contemporary summary, gleaned from a quick reading of the headlines, "In reaction to mass protests after the fraudulent presidential election in June, the Guard's control has expanded comprehensively," since there is a more than a grain of truth that the IRGC has expanded its political and economic interests. But to portray this as a steady, downhill process linked to the "mullahs" (you know, the "mullahs" like Montazeri, Dastgheib, Karroubi, Sane'i, Bayat Zanjani who have criticised the regime of violence) seems a bit sweeping. And it kind of obliterates not only leaders like Hashemi Rafsanjani but also Mohammad Khatami.

You know, the Mohammad Khatami who sought a thaw in relations with the United States and who was rewarded by the Bush Administration --- the Bush Administration that Gerson served --- with a cut-off of talks, threatening rhetoric, and even consideration of regime change. The Mohammad Khatami who was left to dangle in Iranian domestic politics when his assurances that an engagement with the West would be productive turned into political dust.

OK, maybe we can let Gerson off the hook for his historical amnesia given that he just scribbled speeches, rather than framed policy. But, in the present day, there is this: "The administration has reduced funding for human rights programs in Iran and looked the other way as exiled opponents of the Iranian regime have been attacked within Iraq."

Ahh, so support of the Green movement means support for the "exiled opponents" who happen to be the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MKO), the movement carrying out acts of violence since Gerson's 1979 starting point to topple the Iranian Government. The Mujahedin-e-Khalq who are still listed as a "terrorist" organisation by the State Department. In that context, Gerson's next sentence takes astounding to a new level: "In addition to serious economic and military pressure, Obama could try the strategy the Iranian regime most fears: supporting, overtly and covertly, the democratic resistance against military rule."

So the best way to confront an Iranian Government that tries to prop up its shaky position by screaming "velvet revolution" is to support a "velvet revolution" including an organisation whose acitivities put it, even for many Iranians who are opposed to the current Government, beyond the acceptable? Even the dimmest student in my second-year course on The CIA and US Foreign Policy wouldn't put forth this plan.

I'm not sure whether Mr Gerson is being cynical in his reduction of history and his advocacy of regime change or if he is just ignorant about Iran. I do know, however, that he is deceptive if he claims to be a friend of the Green Movement.

For if the nuclear issue didn't exist, Gerson wouldn't give a rat's-ass about the Iranian opposition. The dreaded prospect of Iran With Bombs is the subject of the first eight paragraphs of a ten-paragraph article. The "democratic uprising" only makes an entrance when Gerson decides that other possibilities for a nuclear victory --- sanctions "would require a number of unreliable nations to sacrifice large economic interests"; "direct military options are uncertain" --- won't work.

Even the headline writer for Gerson's piece doesn't fall for the author's false love of Iranian democracy and reform, putting on the title, "Green Leverage over Iran". Leverage? If I weren't such a Southern gentleman, I'd tell Mr Gerson where he could stick his leverage.

But I return to the start of this piece: thank you, sir, for a timely reminder. A reminder not only that, for all my concerns about the Obama Administration, its predecessor offered no hope and only the prospect of more damage. And a reminder that the Green Movement, for all the tensions over its plans and objectives, is far more than the pawn put forward by false friends.

Iran: English Text of Ayatollah Montazeri's Answers on the Green Movement

Translated and posted on Anonymous Iran:

QUESTIONS TO GRAND AYATOLLAH MONTAZERI:

Before the election the Iranian society had the desire to improve politically and economically. People had legitimate desires, and there was unparalleled excitement and positiveness as people took part in the election. But those people in power, with the help of "engineered votes", changed society’s situation to what we are witnessing now.

Iran Document: Ayatollah Montazeri’s Interview on Eve of 13 Aban
The Latest from Iran (3 December): Normal Service?

The Green movement after the election, represented the desire of the majority of the nation. But in doing so they suffered imprisonment and...torture and some even became martyrs. They hoped that by emphasizing the avoidance of violence that they would achieve their goals, until with God’s Blessing this movement would become widespread throughout the country. But for people to continue in this way, they need the answers to many questions. I respectively ask for your answers, that you will show the way to the movement and be a support to this oppressed nation.

In your opinion:

What were the achievements of the Sea of Green Movement over recent months?
What are the factors that could stop the movement from expansion and make the way harder for them?
What are the ways that would strengthen, safe-guard and protect the movement?
What do you suggest to make the movement grow and blossom?”

Grand Ayatollah Montazeri’s reply:

In the name of God the compassionate and the merciful,

"God will not change any nations circumstances unless the time that they themselves decide to change it’" Qu’ran Surah Ra’ad Aya 11

With greetings and appreciation of your concern regarding the current situation which is determining the fate of the nation:

1. The Sea of Green Movement is the real representation of the legitimate demands of the majority of the Iranian nation, over many years.

Up to now it has been facing the rough and extreme retaliation of the fundamentalist ruling regime, but the achievements of the Movement both nationally and internationally cannot be overlooked or ignored. This movement inside the country managed to establish a culture of peacefully demanding the rights of the nation. After the election, the movement exposed the real face of the oppressive and fundamentalist group (regime?). And of course the movement has suffered a very high cost. This shows that people won’t be satisfied with anything less than achieving their legitimate rights.

Killing, terrorizing, intimidation, arrests, irreligious and illegal show trials, along with the harsh and unjust sentences of active politicians and freedom seekers and lying and deceiving propaganda, have had no effect on people’s commitment or desire.

The foreign effect has been to change the view of foreign countries, especially those in the developed world, and among Human Rights agencies, about the desire of the nation and the suppression of the people. It has shown the real power of the nation to the world.

2. From amongst the factors that could be an obstacle to the movement’s legitimate expansion:

The use of deviating and divisive slogans. Any unsuitable slogans could give an excuse to the hard-line fundamentalists to put down the movement. The movement has both legitimate and legal desires and should pursue them peacefully. They should not respond to the violence and oppression with slogans or acts in ways that the regime would benefit. Things have been done deliberately to derail the movement and on many occasions people have seen both personal and public property being destroyed by the regime in order to blame and discredit the movement.

Another factor is expecting a quick victory with no patience. The movement should not show impatience to achieve the nation’s goals, but should have atience against roughness and disaster and perseverance in the way of justice....Perseverance to achieve rights is based in the important teaching of religion --- not only is it taught in the Qu’ran, but it is also reaffirmed in the Hadiths.

The third factor is differing views of how to achieve the end goal of the rights for the people. Disagreement on how to "encourage the good, and discourage the bad" can cause very serious damage to the cause and the people’s movement. In this subject the trusted and effective figures in the nation can clarify the legal and religious demands of the people and create full understanding with each other to avoid the aforementioned divisions and so strengthen the popular movement and safeguard against damage.

3. It is clear that those people who try to achieve the nation’s rights, in reality they do their national and religious duty of encouraging the good and discouraging the bad.

First of all they should show themselves to do right and good and avoid the futility of the bad. They should protect the boundaries of morality and religion, for their actions and movement to be in the way of the Creator and for the good of the people.

Once again I emphasize and repeat, I warn the rulers that the way you are walking on will bring nothing but damage and destruction not just to the religion, but also to the "earthly" issues, both upon yourselves and upon the nation.

Being loyal to the law and respecting the nation’s right is the best way to show a ruler’s good will.
Selfishness, greed, domination and the acts of violence against the nation, such the irreligious and illegal show trials of respected politicians and the heavy sentences for them, will have the outcome of isolation of the country and the system in the world. It puts even more distance between the people and the rulers and is destroying the face of the "oppressed Islam". And in the end it will bring God’s anger.

I hope that the people in charge will as soon as possible correct the futile way of wrong and will try to achieve the will of the creator and the nation.