 |
| |
|
|
Ramo
|
 |
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999
time: 23:28
|
|
quote:
Pentagon Adds to Despair of Iran's Reformers
by Dan De Luce in Tehran
The Pentagon's pronouncement that it would seek to "destabilize" Iran's Islamic republic has given the country's clerics ammunition to portray their liberal opponents as traitors. Hardly a day passes without warnings in the official press against reformists accused of sowing divisions.
"America is trying to undermine our national unity by provoking chaos and political differences as well as creating a crisis," said Mohammed Baqer Zolqadr, the deputy commander of the Revolutionary Guards.
Washington's rhetoric could not have come at a more awkward time for President Mohammed Khatami and his allies in parliament. As the political and constitutional battle between reformists and Islamists comes to a head, the US intervention is a distraction and a pretext for muffling dissent.
Reformist MPs, who form a parliamentary majority, are threatening to resign en masse after repeated obstruction by conservatives on the guardian council, an unelected body but possessing a constitutional veto over legislative change.
The final straw came last month when the council rejected two bills proposed by President Khatami that would have ended clerical authority over the judiciary and the electoral process.
Conservatives portray the threat to resign as naive and dangerous, damaging Iran's national security at a time when the US military encircles Iran. The state prosecutor warned MPs that they might face legal action if their resignations threatened "national interests".
If the MPs do stay, they will enter February's elections with nothing to show for their promises of change. If they step down, the conservatives may choose to impose emergency rule to pre-empt protest.
Diplomats say President Khatami and other reformers are furious that the US has decided to publicly pressure Iran at such a delicate time.
Perhaps more damaging has been Washington's efforts to promote Reza Pahlavi, the son of the shah overthrown in 1979. Even the most radical democracy activists regard him as a laughing stock when he appears on satellite TV broadcasts from Los Angeles.
Irrespective of US meddling, Iran's democracy experiment seems to have hit a brick wall. Six years since the smiling, soft-spoken president was elected on a wave of optimism, Iranians are wondering what happened. "I'm in my 30s. By the time things change, I'll be an old woman," said a professor. "That's too late for me."
At the weekend, 130 reformist MPs issued an open letter to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who as supreme leader, or head of state, has the constitutional role of advising the president, warning that Iran might slide into dictatorship if conservatives were allowed to flout the popular will.
President Khatami has hinted in the past he might resign. But he has offered no rallying cry. His manner seems more suited to academia, and some close associates say he will seek a negotiated compromise at almost any cost.
The clerics cite the constitution and sharia law to justify their veto - although the reformers claim they exceed their constitutional powers - and appear in no mood to compromise. Many of President Khatami's allies fear negotiation would end in the death of the movement.
Reformists started to lose their footing in 1999, when student protests were brutally crushed by the Basij militia. "Ever since then, reformers have been on the defensive, afraid of triggering more repression or violence," said one Iranian analyst. At local elections in February, voters expressed disillusionment by staying away from polls, enabling conservatives to win major cities.
Marking the sixth anniversary of his landslide election, the president last week acknowledged the reform campaign had lost its momentum. "The reality is that we are in a new atmosphere today, and due to natural and unnatural reasons, the original zest and enthusiasm has faded," he wrote.
His detractors see him as an Iranian Alexander Dubcek, the 1968 Czechoslovak "Prague Spring" leader too much part of communism to reform it and too diplomatic a personality to do battle.
President Khatami's supporters say he has pushed the system as far as he could.
"He was the right man at the right time in 1997. He opened up discussion and debate. But his chapter is closing," said a middle-aged businesswoman. "Someone else will have to emerge for the next stage." |
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0527-02.htm
Shrub's policy towards Iran really has been totally disastrous. As long as the US is seen as a threat to Iran, the conservatives can prevent any changes by the reformists.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:28
|
|
At the very least Ashcroft wouldn't be in office, and that's worth having Gore in power by quite a bit.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Cruddy
|
|
What I find very strange about this story is that an institution supposedly committed to "defending" is out to destabilise a foreign power.
What is even more surprising is that the inhabitants of said foreign power had a popular revolt to kick out the US 2 decades ago.
You would think the Pentagon could take a hint like that.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Iranian reform wasn't going anywhere, anyway, and that's about 90% of the problem. |
Still doesn't make it a brilliant idea for the pentagon ***** to ease the domestic pressure on the Mullahs.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord Merciless
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Victor Galis
When stability drops (but not to the point of revolution), who do you honestly think will gain ground: authoritarian clerics or reformers who have limited power and have lost their steam. |
Depends on who gets blamed. Destabilization usually means those who in power will take the heat. The West was quite successful in destabilizing the Eastern block during the 1980s. Just one reformer at leadership position was sufficient to turn the entire commie world upside down.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
How exactly did the west destablize the eastern bloc?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord Merciless
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by HershOstropoler
How exactly did the west destablize the eastern bloc? |
"Mr Gorbachev, please tear down this wall!", dissidents, BBC, pictures of supermarket vs breadline, and Mercedes vs Trabant.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Merciless
"Mr Gorbachev, please tear down this wall!", dissidents, BBC, pictures of supermarket vs breadline, and Mercedes vs Trabant. |
We didn't make dissidents. Apart from that, right. We were essentially just sitting there, which was sufficient to demonstrate the crass inferiority of communism and see it rot away.
So why would you think active destabilisation is suddenly a brilliant idea now?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sikander
Thus the bad boys in Iran support terror on an industrial scale and pursue nuclear weapons and missles... |
Well, why shouldn't they? If it's ok for Pakistan, what right does the US administration have to ***** about Iran? If it's ok for the US admin to blatantly violate international law, why should Iran give a ****?
If we take out legal and moral issues though, the Bushies have to make up their mind. Either they take out Iran's nuclear program by force, or they offer Iran something in exchage for scrapping it. Currently it looks like they really think they can talk the Mullahs out of it.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28.
Apolyton Time is 00:28. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
28-05-2003 08:56
|