"Iran at a Crossroads": Scott Lucas Speaks in Washington

UPDATE 9 MARCH: I'm setting off in a few hours. Iran updates will be lighter than usual  until Saturday, but we will keep our eyes on events and try and keep you posted. And, of course, our readers --- thanks to all of you for advice for this trip --- can be relied upon to provide information and comment.

have been invited to speak next Wednesday  at "Iran at a Crossroads", a hearing organised by the National Iranian American Council  at the US Senate Office Building in Washington, DC. The event, sponsored by US Senators and including statements from US Congressman, is expected to draw an audience of legislators, government officials, and journalists, as well as the general public.

The event will be live-streamed from 9 a.m. local time(1400 GMT) at NIACInsight.

9:30 AM-9:45 AM

WELCOMING REMARKS

Congresswoman Anna Eshoo (CA-14)



9:45 AM-10:15 AM

SPECIAL ADDRESS
Congressman Keith Ellison (MN-5)

10:15 AM-11:30 AM

PANEL I:  A CENTURY OLD STRUGGLE FOR DEMOCRACY

Prof. Shireen Hunter

Visiting Fellow, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University

Prof. Scott Lucas

Professor, University of Birmingham, UK, Editor, Enduring America Blog

Prof. Ahmad Karimi-Hakkak

Director, Roshan Cultural Heritage Institute Center for Persian Studies, University of Maryland

Moderator

Neil MacFarquhar

New York Times

12:00 PM-12:15 PM

SPECIAL ADDRESS

Congressman Mike Honda (CA-15)

12:15 PM-1:30 PM

PANEL II:  THE US AND IRAN: BACK TO CONFRONTATION?

Prof. Juan Cole

Richard P. Mitchell Collegiate Professor of History, University of Michigan

Amb. Robert Hunter

Senior Advisor, RAND Corporation

Prof. Muhammad Sahimi

Professor, University of Southern California

Moderator

Dr. Trita Parsi

President, National Iranian American Council

1:30pm – 1:45 pm

CLOSING REMARKS
Dr. Trita Parsi

President, National Iranian American Council

Comments

[Megan]

Ange,

Thanks for your words of wisdom. I recall this NIAC crazed fan and Trita Parsi groupie, Green Activist Lurker, harassed you on this very same blog when you called to question Parsi’s motives. They try to silence people by intimidation. Under my constitutionally protected rights I can call to question very high level public figures and I can do the same for a “nobody” like Parsi.

I am laughing my head off seeing this nutty person, Green Activist Lurker, blowing a gasket every time someone says Parsi who? I take Lurker remarks as RFI (radio frequency interference), the same thing IR does to jam radio and television broadcast in Iran. You just have to ignore it and keep marching forward.

I will not waste my time and dignify this person with any rebuttal. I prefer to spend the precious little time we have on trying to help those who need help in Iran. This person can rant as much as he/she wants for whomever she/he fancies. It is a good comic relief seeing Lurker blowing a fuse or two. I am having a blast

[Catherine]

@ Green Activist
I find all the nitpicking in the controversies surrounding the NIAC to be irrelevant to the larger discussion at hand: how should the US proceed in its policy toward Iran? Thanks for your short and simple breakdown of the different US policy positions, from neo-cons to realists. My learning curve is still in its ascent regarding this issue, but I do know that the neo-con option is a lose-lose proposition. I can't seem to shake the suspicion, though, that the Obama administration is still trying for for the realist outcome through back room dealing while publicly leaning towards a selection of tactics from both the crippling and the targeted approaches you describe above.

[Megan]

Green Machine,

Thank you for confirming that no one in Iran cares about who Parsi is or what he does or does not stand for. Indeed, if you bring his name up they reply “who?” followed by a few choice words.

[M. Ali]

I'm sick of you commenters that say that they are speaking for the Iranian people. I'm looking at you Megan, Green Machine, etc.

The Iranian nation is complex and fragmented, the Iranian government is complex and fragmented, so please stop acting like any of you somehow know what The Iranian wants.

[An activist Green Lurker]

its amazing how some of you folks (Megan, angie, Green Machine, Maziar) have such a victimized mentality. no one is keeping you from stating your opinion... but I am and have consistently CHALLENGED your unfounded opinions.

your incessant insistence on belittling the messenger (Parsi or me) rather than debating NIAC, Parsi, or my acttual points shows any and all readers that you have no argument to stand on besides calling others names.

if you want to live in your own bubble, you are no different than the Glenn Becks or the AN's of the world... its up to you. You want to call Parsi irrelevant, thats fine, it does not make it true.

you want to call anyone who disagrees with you an IRI agent, go for it - but does not make it true.

I go back to my point - The main question is - WHAT IS THE BEST US POLICY TOWARDS IRAN???

NIAC has made itself clear in article after article. provided reasoning - have you? no.

the one thing that is true - as Ali said - is that among the 75 million Iranians living all over the world - there are tens of millions of different opinions... and no one person represents them all... neither Parsi nor you Mr. Maziar/Green Machine... what IS true is that some try to shed light on this discussion, while others are only interested in adding heat.

[Rev. Magdalen]

Lurker,

I couldn't help noticing that in your list of options for the US you left out the one I suggested: actually enforcing the current human rights laws, to which Iran is a legal signatory, as if everyone really were equal under the law. I suggest the United States treat Khamenei's regime like any other criminals. But there's a reason that won't happen, isn't there. Something makes it unthinkable, right?

I think there is a blind spot in nearly every US analyst's thinking, and I'm not being cute when I say it's exactly like junkies think. If you've ever had to work with those poor unfortunates, you'd know they can be quite brilliant...at figuring out how to get more drugs. And the dealer, he may be quite brutal and the junkie may complain about him a lot...out of earshot. Because he doesn't dare say anything that might jeopardize his access to his drug.

These options everyone's suggesting, they are all based around the premise that the USA absolutely must continue to buy oil at its current rate from foreign dealers, and therefore justice and the international human rights law must come a distant third or fourth behind making the money and finding the connections to get our drug petroleum. We may have several factions disputing the course of action to take, but the thought of getting clean and just not using anymore is not on the table.

None of the solutions you suggest actually solve the United States' main problem. The so-called "realists" you speak of are not realistic at all. Doing whatever it takes to get more of a drug RIGHT NOW, and damn the future consequences or the impact on one's character, is not a realistic move. The reality is that the oil is going to run out someday, possibly within our lifetimes. That's not something it's realistic to just ignore. It's not a realistic plan to say "Well then let's fight each other tooth and nail until the very last drop is gone."

Future generations might really need this petroleum to use for plastics, and our decision to go on burning it for energy, when our planet is literally saturated with tide energy, sun energy, and wind energy, may come to be seen as the stupidest decision a society ever made, even worse than when England cut down all its trees for fuel in the middle ages.

The way I see it, a lot of decent, good folks are being abused by criminals. Just because they wear fancy robes and bang a gavel doesn't make them a government. A government follows laws, these thugs don't. I don't understand why the options for the victims of these crimes are either just put up with it and thank their stars they're not in Somalia, or else make a revolt on their own, unarmed, women and children and all, and seize justice through their own power. Sure those WERE the only options people had, centuries ago, but today we have international criminal courts that are supposed to protect regular people from those who wish to commit crimes against humanity.

Essentially, I see the situation in Iran as like a drug dealer who abuses his children, and everyone who buys from him knows it's going on, and mostly they just turn a blind eye and try to forget it while enjoying their drug, but when a few people do call the cops it turns out they're on the take too, and nobody is going to help those kids, ever.

[Arshama]

Lurker, Mr Ali,

While you continue defending NIAC and Mr Parsi, which I would label rather as middlemen for Iranian business interests than political lobbyists, even though both go hand in hand, crippling sanctions against the IRI have already started with Shell pulling out of Iran-business. Shell (as Glencore, Vitol etc.) is not just any company, and I take its withdrawal as a grave sign for rising tensions and a possible attack on Iran.
Instead of defending your peculiar interests, you should ask yourself, what you can really do for the muzzled Iranian majority, kept as hostage by an inhumane, irrational and warmongering regime, which deems a devastating (khaneman-souz) war as the last resort to its nefarious survival.

[pessimist]

Thanks for all the posts here about NIAC and solutions.

I've always appreciated Megan's straight shootin', clear (and if she says so, non partisan) positions. Yet I also appreciate reading lurker's explanations and others' too.

It is impossible for me to have a clear idea, simply because Megan and Rev and Maziar seem so right, yet for the future I'm sure they can't know the outcome, just as NIAC can't. I watched a doc on the crackdown in Burma in 2007 and it was merciless. No peep out of there since. Thousands were killed or imprisoned.

At that time, there were some pictures and videos and secret interviews coming out but not as much as two years later with Iran. This international media pressure has (I hope) been a deciding factor for Iran, they weren't prepared for it, (the leaders hadn't a clue what twitter or facebook was), and it took them by surprise. They tried to catch up, and managed to get their army of thugs bussed to Tehran and even a semblance of IT posturing (slowing internet, 'cyber army').
Worse, they have silenced the paper news and the voices with prison cells and torture.

But the civilian media revolution has grown and the green movement is relentless and will never let them sleep ; they will always be in the headlines, as they continually are, even without massive protests. Surely this conference is an important event, as it has echos in the press ! It keeps people on their toes, it forces people like me to seek out past history and information. It also shows that we care, and we are not only quarreling over things but we really wish and hope for the best solution, however it is done.

Surely the important thing is to have debate and informative discussions to show that in democratic free countries, this is possible, where it's not in Iran. Don't let those top countries designated as the worst enemies of the internet smirk and say, 'look how they plan in public to overthrow regimes, all our dangerous bloggers are in prison ! [while saying to his translator : "what is 'blogger' ? ] Because these backward repressive countries have leaders that are not in contact with the people nor technology.

Our discussions, conferences, seminars, articles, news, are to show that we are a model. We can make these regimes afraid by talking about overthrowing their nasty regimes, that's GOOD ! If that makes them tremble, so much the better. But we also show that we can be diverse and still live in peace without murders and suicide bombers all over the place. We won't even allow it. If someone says 'death to Iran' in Iran, he will be beaten and maybe executed, not so in US and all democracies. Speech is free, and should remain so.

So there are several lessons and messages included in our free, free speech, and that's what's so great.