Iran's Soft War

The Obama administration shouldn't give up on embattled Iranian democrats. Here's how America can help the Green Revolution succeed.

BY PAULA J. DOBRIANSKY, CHRISTIAN P. WHITON | NOVEMBER 25, 2009

Iran's government has used violence, intimidation, and incarceration to keep the country's opposition at bay since the flawed election there last June. Now, the news trickling out of Tehran this week suggests that a more sophisticated ideological effort is underway -- the "soft war" reported in the New York Times. This goes further than closing opposition news outlets and now reportedly includes placing Basij militia instructors in elementary schools, more media controlled by the country's Revolutionary Guard, and expanded surveillance of the Internet.

Iran's leaders claim they are facing nothing less than a Western-directed "color revolution," just as Russia's allies did in Ukraine, where the Orange Revolution of 2004 and 2005 swept the streets with democratic fervor. But the Orange Revolution was a genuine expression of popular anger, not a plot orchestrated from Washington or Brussels. It was however, aided by diplomacy. Western diplomats can draw on experience learned in Kiev to help the "green movement" in Tehran. The United States and particularly Europe should be doing much more to engage and cultivate this newly vocal "other Iran," sustaining its calls for a democratically chosen government.

Despite obvious differences, the Ukraine of the 1990s had some similarities to today's Iran in its nondemocratic character. Athough Ukraine held regular elections during that period, the U.S. NGO Freedom House noted in 2001 that fewer than 25 percent of Ukrainians considered their country a democracy. Reform-minded politicians had been ousted, and civil liberties were trampled. 

But the situation began to evolve in 2002. For the first time, Ukrainian voters expressed strong support for the opposition in parliamentary elections, despite irregularities, government tampering, and violence against reformers. Following that, Washington and European governments joined the Ukrainian opposition to apply pressure for fair and independently observed elections. Election-monitoring organizations also helped amplify the message. Diplomacy helped transform the next election into a matter of international, not just domestic, concern. This should be a key goal in Iran.

BEHROUZ MEHRI/AFP/Getty Images

 

Paula J. Dobriansky was U.S. undersecretary of state for democracy and global affairs from 2001 to 2009. Christian P. Whiton was a State Department official from 2003 to 2009.

DIPLO.MATE

5:51 AM ET

November 29, 2009

Iran does not need a talking to...

Iran needs to be assured of its territorial security, territorial integrity and respect for its national rights/interests.
Like the other poster stated, Sarkozy would be the worst choice among many to talk to Iran. Iran does not attach much importance to any European country because its main goal is to sit at the table with the US.
Iran and Ukraine are vastly different cases due to the fact that Ukraine was not under any trumped out sanctions. As long as the sanctions mixed with the military threat are held in front of Iran, Iran's resolve to defend its interests will be strong. The best way to break the cycle of distrust is to start talking about removing the existing sanctions and not mentioning any new ones.
The last time Iran trusted the EU and suspended its legal nuclear enrichment program, the EU failed to deliver the US what was Iran's goal all along. This time the EU should stand aside and let Iran and the US to fix the problem they both have created.

 

GRANT

7:30 PM ET

November 29, 2009

I'm not going to comment on

I'm not going to comment on Sarkozy, without diplomatic experience I can't say how effective he might be. France would probably be a good way of discreetly meeting with Iran, and a bit more palatable to the U.S than doing it through Russia.
However the differences between Ukraine and Iran make it astounding that the writers would attempt to link the two. To start the current Iranian government has made it clear that they are fully willing to use force* to maintain their grip on power. The 2004 elections in Ukraine were not so clear. Unlike Ukraine the West has no nation like Poland neighboring Iran that Iran can trust and that the West can rely on to put pressure on it. China and Russia would probably be the closest two and their commitment shifts quite a bit at different times. Lastly, so far we see few signs that the 'color revolutions' in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus have been as successful as was first hoped. In Georgia Saakashvili has shown autocratic tendencies towards the opposition. In Ukraine the opposition that drove out Yanukovych is now fighting freely over policy and doing their best to avoid unity.

*By force I don't just mean beating protesters, I mean murder, military crackdowns, torture, rape, and the free use of militias and intelligence to stop protests.

 

HASS

8:00 AM ET

November 30, 2009

Ukraine was a failure that should not be replicated in Iran

This is a LAUGHABLE article. First of all, there is in fact NO evidence that the elections in Iran were stolen, and polls by US organizations before and after the elections show that the people DID in fact vote for Ahmadinejad.

Second, the Ukranian government has the lowest approval rating of any government in the ENTIRE WORLD according to Gallup.

http://www.iranaffairs.com/iran_affairs/2009/08/iran-color-revolution.html

 

GRANT

9:30 AM ET

November 30, 2009

I feel that this article from

I feel that this article from the BBC makes the point clear, but to summarize with one example:

"The study says: "In a third of all provinces, the official results would require that Ahmadinejad took not only all former conservative voters, and all former centrist voters, and all new voters, but also up to 44% of former reformist voters, despite a decade of conflict between these two groups.""

Not only does that beggar belief, one very constant trend across the planet is that leaders who face election in times of great economic trouble rarely do well and I have never heard of one who did so well as he has claimed to. Also that doesn't explain the violence after the election.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8113885.stm

 

F1FAN

9:41 AM ET

November 30, 2009

Sure we can suppirt Iran's Opposition......

But should we? I ask Americans to just think for a second. Imagine if after the 2000 elections in the US, which had at least as many irregularities in two states as bad as the ones in Iran, if instead of accepting the Supreme Court decision Al Gore and the Democrats allied themselves with a foreign power to gain the Presidency that the election and due process denied them.

Before we cast stones at other nations electoral processes we first need to fix our own and then need to think about what message we send when we meddle in other countries elections. The only 'success' in the Ukraine has been years of deadlock and a sharpening divide between 'Pro-Western' camps and 'Pro-Russian' Camps. If we look at history, trying to effect regime change usually ends up very badly.

 

RHYNO327

12:26 PM ET

November 30, 2009

apocalyptic mullahs

good luck trying to talk with thier "supreme leader" and that stooge a-jad..they are hell bent on acquiring nuclear weapons and the talk is coming to an end..just like the iranian military when it gets a taste of thier own medicine. a terrorist regime, which needs an azz whupping..then we'll talk...

 

PIROUZ

2:09 AM ET

December 1, 2009

HASS is right

What are Paula and Christian thinking? Are they totally unaware of what Iran's political establishment thinks of Sarkozy and his publicly stated anti-Iran agenda? Where in the world did they get their idea of a Sarkozy-Khamenei summit?

Paula and Christian are completely out of touch with the reality of the Iranian political establishment.

What's the result of this article? Take a gander at the FARS news site. They are all over this article as PROOF of their need to counter Western directed attempts at subversion and treason upon their homeland. They could well be right.