Thankful Attention of IRGC to US Concerns over Voice of America

This past Thanksgiving holiday, the IRGC posted an article regarding Voice of America’s Persian News Network, related activities in the US Government, analyses and concerns raised by institutes and scholars including Heritage Foundation, Amir A. Fakhravar and Iranian Freedom Institute, Roya Hakakian and Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (1). A few weeks ago, a similar article was posted by both Revolutionary Guards to young Basij (2), and Hezbollah special forces for Khameini (3), but this one is more detailed. I do not suspect that Thanksgiving is celebrated inside Iran. Though, it is interesting timing nonetheless, given the profiled Amir Fakhravar’s family is practically held hostage inside the country (4), and Fakhravar has not so much as been able to share the dinner table with his kin since escaping in Spring 2006.

It seems that the IRGC has some concerns regarding US policy and pending changes at VOA, and so perhaps it is best to answer their questions point by point, and provide some clarity. 

The Guards should be aware that sixty-nine Republican members of US Congress signed a letter by Rep. Trent Franks (also a Republican), that did request Obama to investigate VOA/PNN and stand with the freedom fighters inside Iran (5). However, this was not the first time the White House has been addressed. Rather, investigations have been ongoing for a few years, including by the Inspector General at the State Department. 

President Barack Hussein Obama, who seems to embrace principles of Sunni Muslims as part of his bloodline, has not been terribly responsive to the calls. Rather, in a recommendation letter by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf of the Cordoba Initiative, the inter-faith promoting, internationally known Imam suggested that President Obama refrain from intervening in Iranian politics (6). This is a perplexing situation for Americans, as Imam Rauf has historically spent time with Mohammad Javad Larijani, and Democrats are typically the most concerned with human rights. It is also questionable as to why, after many years, the Obama Administration pulled State Department funding from Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (7).

Since the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s supporting African-Americans, US conservatives have not been known to ask a President of the United States or his Secretary of State to raise awareness on human rights issues. It seems that the Obama Administration is also perplexed, confused as to why Republicans would suddenly be standing for human rights, and so he may simply be hesitant to respond to an opposing party. Unfortunately, President Obama may not be aware that peace-loving Mosques inside Iran are being attacked, merely because it is the conservatives who are trying to tell him about his suffering brothers and sisters in Iran; leaving Sunni rebels to fight back alone against Revolutionary Guards inside a Shia Mosque (8). 

Given President Obama’s lack of response to Sunni brothers and sisters, and continued initiatives throughout the Muslim World, it is not advantageous to suggest that his Administration would cast any stone against the Islamic Republic. Though, American citizens are growing more and more concerned for the Iranian people as days go by, and dozens if not hundreds are massacred every week, like an Iranian Holocaust. 

If Roya Hakakian’s organization did have federal funding restored, then perhaps the West would be more cognizant of this treachery within, as the George Soros sponsored Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International cover just a few cases at a time. In reflection of Tehran Bureau’s standard practice, lack of reporting by VOA/PNN, and related journalistic integrity of US media, certainly these charities are needed to verify the high number of horror stories, so that the general public can be notified. Hakakian may be right to be concerned about the relationship between major corporations and western media. However, publicly traded firms do face public scrutiny for corporate social responsibility, and likely would pay for advertising to support US news reports if they were aware of the atrocities, or would provide tax-deductible contributions to fund human rights research required to produce investigative reports. 

In a recent private review of VOA/PNN, it was interesting to see that contenders like Amir Fakhravar, Hassan Dai, and Reza Pahlavi have been banned from interviews, though groups criticized for being lenient towards the regime gain much attention. Such individuals include Trita Parsi and Reza Aslan of NIAC, Ahmad Karimi-Hakkak from University of Maryland, Abbas Milani of Stanford University, and Akbar Ganji, a former Revolutionary Guard. Ganji became a human rights activist, and is exiled in the US after having tortured in Evin Prison, and liberated by President George W. Bush. Similarly, Vali Nasr was featured on Urdu VOA, a broadcast into Palestine which also covered President Obama’s lack of support for the Iranian opposition. 

The VOA related events mentioned in the IRGC piece actually occurred on November 17, were profiled by the National Iranian American Council (9), attended by Center for American Progress, and covered by Voice of America, including an interview with former CIA director R. James Woolsey. Fakhravar did not attend the planned demonstration outside of VOA property, and it is questionable as to if the protest even occurred, as there was no news coverage nor photos of the event promoted by Freedom Watch, an organization Fakhravar is not affiliated with. However, Fakhravar did visit the panel NIAC reviewed, only after the event ended, to bid his respects to panelists and attendees. One panelist which NIAC failed to mention was Reza Kahlili, former CIA operative of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, who made a compelling speech based on his decades of experience with the Guards, IRGC, in both Iran and Europe. 

NIAC did have justifiable criticisms of other panelists. Mr. Heffner was correct that Ken Timmerman innocently misunderstood the demonstration video in Farsi, where protesters are walking with images of Mousavi saying “Obama Ya Ba Oona Ya Ba Ma,” or “Obama, are you with them or with us?” (10) This is in fact, a very poignant moment from last year, when peaceful protesters were simply responding to Obama’s statement that he would not interfere in Iranian politics. 

It is true also, that Rep. Michele Bachmann, leading Tea Party spokeswoman from Minnesota spoke out in support of MEK. Rep. Bachmann, though very popular among US conservatives, is also very new to the Iranian opposition, and is only beginning to get to know the diversity of groups who are part of the freedom movement. Rep. Bachmann is a very sincere and kind-hearted woman who appears to be very grateful to meet Iranian freedom fighters, and seeks to do anything she can to support the liberation of Iran. 

At the panel, Center for American Progress questioned James Woolsey as to the quality of negotiations with Iran. Given back-door negotiations with Khatami have been the subject of debate and investigative journalism for a few years, including a host of articles in Farsi referencing Hooman Majd, it is interesting that CAP would be so concerned. 

In retrospect, it is true that more Americans have voted on the famed “American Idol” than have participated in politics. It is only as of the 2008 election that the United States has seen record voter turnout, including active participation of the African-American community, who fought for and won the right to vote only decades ago. It is true that more Americans may pay attention to Hollywood films and “Reality TV” than the political range of newscasts between FoxNews, MSNBC, CNN, or NPR. This is why politicians like President Obama and Sarah Palin participate in cable and daytime shows, like “The View” or Jon Stewart. But still, no entertainment show nor comedy news hour is in any position to exhibit the butchery of torture, deathly rape, or mass hangings. For so long as Americans eat popcorn, hot dogs, and apple pie during the joyous holiday season, the regime can buy more time and western audiences will continue to merely see news flashes that the Islamic Republic is nearing capability of a nuclear bomb to take out Israel, US military bases throughout the Middle East, and certain European countries. 

Socrates said, “Wisest is he who knows he knows not.” And would for we be the wiser. 

References:

(1) “Congressional Investigation of Voice of America Persian,” Mashregh News (Soft War site of IRGC), November 25, 2010:http://mashreghnews.ir/NSite/FullStory/News/?Id=12609

(2) Revolutionary Guards to Young Basijis (Farsi):http://world.yjc.ir/NewsDesc.aspx?newsid=373455 

(3) Special forces division of Hezbollah supporting Ayatollah Khameini (Farsi): http://ammariyon.ir/fa/pages/?cid=2404

(4) “Fakhravar Family Treated Like Hostages Inside Iran,” Iran Live News, Velma Anne Ruth, October 22, 2010:http://www.iranlivenews.com/2010/10/22/fakhravar-family-treated-like-hostages-inside-iran/ 

(5) Republican Congressional Letter to Pres. Barack Obama:http://www.absnetwork.org/media/AA/AH/absnetwork-org/downloads/96541/Congress_Writing_President_Obama.pdf

(6) “What President Obama Should Say About Iran’s Election,” Huffington Post, Imam Feisel Abdul Rauf, June 19, 2009:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/imam-feisal-abdul-rauf/what-president-obama-shou_b_218249.html

(7) “US funds dry up for Iran rights watchdog, Obama White House less confrontational,” Boston Globe, Farah Stockman, October 6, 2009:http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2009/10/06/us_cutoff_of_funding_to_iran_human_rights_cause_signals_shift/ 

(8) “Jundallah claims deadly Iran blasts,” Al Jazeera, July 16, 2010:http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/07/201071518824599686.html 

(9) “Conference Focuses on ‘Regime Change’ in Iran through US, Western Intervention,” NIAC, Patrick Heffner, November 18, 2010:http://www.niacouncil.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6865&security=1&news_iv_ctrl=-1

(10) “Obama Ya Ba Oona Ya Ba Ma,” Demonstrators in Tehran, Citizen Journalist, November 4, 2009: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UluBN_CI2s 

Revolutionary Guards & Hezbollah React to Change at US Funded Voice of America

By Velma Anne Ruth and Cyrus Shares

November 6, 2010

Download Article in PDF

Since 2006 there have been considerable efforts to address Voice of America’s Persian News Service (VOA/PNN), the US government funded media outlet which broadcasts into Iran. The Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) is the federal organization responsible for managing PNN and other newscasts reaching citizens of countries like Cuba, and historically Russia. In response to political unrest inside Iran during the massive election demonstrations in June 2009, Republican members of Congress increased efforts to reach the Administration, and strongly encouraged VOA/PNN to be used in support of the Iranian people (a & b). Between 2006 and current events, changes continue to be made at VOA and BBG, starting within administrative arms and working their way out to the public platform. In the meantime, viewership inside Iran is dropping, and shows have been cut from PNN. 

Amir A. Fakhravar is an Iranian opposition leader exiled in the US, survivor of Iran’s viscous political prisons, whose efforts in the west date back to 2006 in his first testimony to US Congress (c). Last week the Iranian military posted a statement against Fakhravar’s leadership in opposition to the regime and reform of VOA, not once, but three times. At first, Revolutionary Guards made statement to young Basijis (d). Within days the same text was posted by a special forces group of Hezbollah under Ayatollah Khameini (e), and then an affiliated website based in the US (f). The combination of IRGC, Hezbollah, and the Supreme Leader suggest the Islamic Republic is on guard. 

Here is their statement, with revised translation from Farsi to English, where the Guards took heed to Helle Bale’s article at Heritage Foundation, which reflects Fakhravar’s pursuit of free press and liberty for Iranians through non-violent means (g):

"The Voice of Sedition,” by Young Journalists Club, Revolutionary Guards of Iran

Based on a report from the Heritage Foundation, Amir Fakhravar who is in close relations with George W. Bush, US senators, has met with Vaclav Havel the mastermind behind the colored coups several times; encouraged sanctions, and increase of VOA and BBC's interference and penetration as the best ways to fuel and direct chaos and uprising in Iran.

He believes VOA is the only media outlet that, next to BBC can build a bridge between the trouble-makers (revolutionaries) inside, and the leaders of sedition outside the country.

After VOA's failed attempts to direct leaders of sedition during post-election unrest, now some experts including several US senators have proposed reform of this media outlet, and Fakhravar agrees with them.

It's very interesting that Amir Fakhravar (aka., Siavash) is one of the founders of the independent student movement, whose anti-regime activities peaked during 1994-95, escaped from Iran in 2006 and moved to America. During his stay in America he has repeatedly called for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic.

Hierarchically, Basij forces are an integrated subdivision of, and administratively answer to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC). Hizballah are a wholly-owned subsidiary of the IRGC/Qods Force, while Nasrallah has publicly pledged bayat to Khamenei. They will attack when, where, and how the Supreme Leader orders. What’s more, not all Guards are Iranian. Some are Arab who immigrated into Iran to serve the armed forces and as military police. Inside Iran, Basij and Guards butcher and rape citizens on a daily basis, to the level of an Iranian holocaust, that has been ongoing since the installation of the Islamic Republic in 1979. 

Revolutionary Guards have been ordered to shoot Amir Fakhravar on sight, suggesting this online post may be a message to educate forces about a certain target. The article was originally addressed to Basij inside Iran, but who is the intended US audience? By reflecting on Fakhravar’s role in the student movement dating back to the late 1990s, any student also in opposition, perhaps including members of Fakhravar’s Confederation of Iranian Students (h), could also be under threat. This leading opposition group has chapters inside and outside Iran, including in the United States, Canada, Europe, Malaysia, and Australia (i). Each member of the student body, leaders, and Fakhravar himself is committed to Gandhi-like peace. Not once have they ever made any threat of violence against the Islamic Republic. However, the Guards appear committed to preemptive strikes. 

With attentive smite to the above mentioned article under leading conservative Heritage Foundation, Revolutionary Guards directly recognize Fakhravar’s historical involvement in the student movement, extensive policy work in the west, and continued influence in the Iranian freedom movement. The pompous tenor of the Guards reflection is as if the Islamic Republic is rhetorically complaining: Why are you doing this to us, Fakhravar?  

Consider the spiritual language used by the Guards. The article title is “Voice of Fetneh” (aka., Fitne or Fitnah) which is not Persian but Islamic-Arabic, referring to civil war and divisions within Islam. The Islamic Republic considers clerics who oppose current religious policies as leaders of fitne (aka., Sarane Fetne).  If VOA was a pro-western or pro-regime change platform, Revolutionary Guards would have used the phrase “Voice of Great Satan,” “Voice of Zionism,” “Voice of Imperialism,” or another spiritual disregard for ideological enemies. 

The term “fitna” addresses opposition from within. VOA is considered the “Voice of Fitna” because it only gives time to fraudulent opposition within Iran and reformists, while rejecting and banning groups seeking secular democracy, liberty and justice. Fakhravar is one of multiple dissidents banned from VOA, following his testimony to US Congress in June 2006.

The Qu’ran says "Fitna is worse than killing" (Q 2:191), that to impede a Muslim community in any way from practicing and spreading Shariah is far worse than taking up arms to fight and kill those responsible for putting such impediments in the way of Muslims. Islam considers all unbelievers as “Nejes,” contaminated to the decree that if a Muslim touches them or eats food touched by them, that Muslim becomes spiritually unholy and their prayers will be void. This is an extreme platform of hate and discrimination towards those with differing beliefs, which compares infidels to pigs, dogs, excretion, and is an ultimate insult to humanity. 

The free world decrees that no one individual deserves to be harmed, no matter race, color, or creed, and war is only for defense. In consideration of those who are Sharia compliant, it is “peace-loving” Muslims who resist violence in all forms, denounce segments of the Qu’ran which purport unjustifiable harm against others, and also denounce terrorism. Unfortunately, the Persian-speaking audience is not likely to find a peace-loving Muslim on VOA’s Persian News Network; as to denounce terrorism, is to denounce the very Revolutionary Guards who are speaking out against Fakhravar. 

In the spirit of Islamic extremism, the Guards may be claiming that Amir Fakhravar is "sowing mischief in the land" (Q 5:32-33) by successfully addressing VOA/PNN. However, Fakhravar is not doing anything with Iranian media inside the country, and has no bearing on the productions of regime media such as PressTV. Fakhravar resides on US soil, on the other side of the planet, and is speaking with Americans about their media platform which broadcasts in. Therefore, any Islamic extremist concerns about Fitna do not necessarily apply in these modern times, most especially given Amir Abbas Fakhravar is Iranian-American.

Does the Islamic Republic feel they are a stakeholder of this news outlet? If so, US Congress could rightfully and respectably submit that VOA is not owned by the Iranian government, but rather by the American people. The US Secretary of State is on the Board of BBG. By design, news stories are supposed to be governed by Americans. American tax payers sponsor a VOA that is supposed to reflect liberty, and not concede to violence in the face of an oppressed people. What’s more, the future of VOA is up to US policy makers, not Iranian officials, who seek truth in news, not “taqiyya.” 

With all due respect to IRGC, the US separates Church and State, and VOA is run by a government and people which stands for an internationally influential secular constitution. For Iran, it is understandable that they would be concerned for spiritual wrongdoings, because Sharia Law is part of their constitution. However, the United States is not a Muslim country, and Iran is not as Islamic as it seems. America maintains freedom to practice any religion one believes, while reportedly many Iranian citizens are not Muslim, but are Atheist, Agnostic, Bahai, Zoroasterian, Christian, Jewish; though there are both Shia and Sunni Muslims. The Islamic Republic is spiritually diverse, except that Shiria Law allows the Guards to seize any human being, to rape, torture, or murder, in the name of Islamic order and excessive false convictions.  

Consider the views of Imam Feisal Rauf, pictured here with the head of human rights in Iran, Mohammad Larijani (image copyright Cordoba Initiative). Imam Rauf is quoted as saying that the US constitution is compliant with Sharia Law. As such, if free press is part of the US constitution, and Fakhravar is merely preserving the American's right to use their media as they see fit, then there is no offense against the Muslim community. 

As stated in Imam Rauf’s book (j):

“American Constitution and system of governance uphold the core principles of Islamic law...American political structure is Shariah-compliant..[in the] defined five areas of life [to be protected by Islamic law — life, mind, religion, property, and family]...[Invite] voices of all religions to join the dialogue in shaping the nation’s practical life, [and allow] religious communities more leeway to judge among themselves according to their own laws” 

Given Imam Rauf's stated positioning, involvement with both the Obama Administration and State Department, and apparent affiliation with the Islamic Republic, it is questionable as to the Cordoba Initiative’s stance on Voice of America’s coverage of this generation’s revolution inside Iran. 

Granted, the Obama Administration may be enabling a bias of appeasement in the Persian News Network, but has this internationally renowned Imam confronted the Islamic Republic and its supporters on the massacre of tens, if not hundreds of thousands of Iranian citizens by its own government? Did his State Department funded tour of the Muslim world include address to violence and media propaganda? Would Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf call out for an end to the atrocities by the Islamic Republic, in the name of Khoda, for his Muslim brothers and sisters inside Iran who call out from their rooftops at night, crying - “Allah o Akbar! Allah o Akbar! Allah o Akbar!” pleading, praying for the massacres to stop? Yet the global community fails to hear them, merely because Voice of America will not report, and the Iranian people are broadcasting through YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and blogs, their only sources for free press and public record. And of President Barack Obama, does Imam Feisal Rauf advise him to say Salam Alekum to the Iranian people? No. In a public letter, Imam Rauf advised the Obama administration to stay out of Iranian politics (k). This is why the Iranian people demonstrate in the streets of Tehran saying “Obama ya ba oona ya ba ma” (aka., Obama, are you with them or with us?). The Iranian people are calling for the leader of the Free World to stand for them. They are turning off the television because Voice of America does not speak to them. 

Given multiple advances by the Republican side of the House and Senate towards both Bush and Obama administrations about VOA, changes are already apparent at BBG, and individuals are being fired from VOA/PNN for concerning activities. However, the Democrats position on this issue remains unclear. Democrats are by definition concerned with social welfare, yet the Iranian people are oppressed by a communist-style economy of rationing, where the black market is the closest thing to a free market. Democrats by culture are concerned with women’s rights, yet Sharia Law inside Iran allows men to rape their wives at will and frequency, while the Islamic Republic advances as a women’s rights leader at the United Nations. The liberal platform purports that the Islamic Republic will use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, yet a recently signed deal including Turkey and Brazil for nuclear advancement in the name of medicine could possibly be used to advance bioweapons. At the same time, there is great push to support Palestine, ACLU is defending Hamas, and Brennan stated Islamic extremism does not exist in a White House backed speech at CSIS (l). The Iranian government has made their intentions to destroy Israel perfectly and repeatedly clear. Israel is a great ally to the United States. This is a great turning point in US history when Republicans are the ones who stand for women’s rights, oppressed people, are firmly against corruption, and refuse to turn their backs on a life-long ally. How are Democrats being advised in this historical era, where a Gandhi-like people are rising up in a revolution against the most dangerous government in the world? Democrats should be proud of these freedom fighters, who brave the loss of life and limb, having already been slaughtered by the masses. Democrats know better than this. 

Ironically, as VOA viewership is dropping inside Iran, Iranians consistently refer to Israeli news as a trusted source. The Iranian people are grateful for Israel’s news sources, while Americans are supporting Palestinian Hamas, an Iran sponsored terror group. To Khameini, Hezbollah, and Revolutionary Guards, it is not in their interests for the Iranian people to be referring to Israeli news. Why then, would the Islamic Republic potentially interfere with Persian News Network, in a manner which pushes viewers away to depend on the Israelis (aka., Zionists)? Khameini is calling for clerics to prevent the fall of the Islamic Republic. Perhaps there are peace-loving clerics that are silenced and under threat, who could rise to the occasion and keep the Iranian people’s eyes on Iran. VOA could be utilized for academic debates on Islam with critics and ex-Muslims in the west, about the growing Atheism and Agnosticism inside Iran, and modern spirituality that lacks religion though embraces inter-faith dialog by definition (i.e., One Love, One God). Given the massacres committed by the Iranian government against its very own citizens, the Iranian people deserve a free press which can liberate their spirit, to at least help them heal from and survive among the ongoing atrocities.

In the midst of Fakhravar’s brave efforts in the west, the Islamic Republic is not on their knees. As a direct attack against Amir Abbas, they have effectively held the Fakhravar family hostage inside Iran, seized passports, put certain members on probation, and relentlessly monitor activities.  Even Parvaneh Fakhravar, Amir Abbas’ innocent mother is called into Revolutionary Court to be harassed with her children and grandchildren on a regular basis. This family has been accused of threats to Iranian security, when they have nothing whatsoever to do with Amir Abbas’ efforts in the west. As Revolutionary Court continues to threaten the family with time in Evin Prison, Mrs. Fakhravar recently suffered a heart attack and aneurism after two days of tears. 

Given the Guards international message against Fakhravar and change from within BBG, it appears the Iranian government is content with current news being broadcast from VOA, its failures to promote liberty since the election fraud demonstrations, and general disinterest in projections of the free world. By acknowledging Fakhravar as a key leader impacting change, their article’s undertone suggests the Islamic Republic actually fears reform of VOA/PNN. However, Voice of America is one of countless media outlets the regime has to work with, and so its reform should be of no concern. Americans retain the right to draw the line and preserve Voice of America as a pillar of free press for the global community, and give Iranians the truth in news they seek.

For continuing updates on reforming VOA’s Persian News Service, 

please see VOA/PNN Watchdog, Iranian Freedom Institute: http://voapnnwatchdog.blogspot.com

References

(a) Republican Congressional Letter to Pres. Barack Obama: http://www.absnetwork.org/media/AA/AH/absnetwork-org/downloads/96541/Congress_Writing_President_Obama.pdf

(b) Republican Congressional Letter to Sec. Hillary R. Clinton: http://www.absnetwork.org/media/AA/AH/absnetwork-org/downloads/96551/Congressional__Letter_to_Secretary_of__State.pdf

(c) Iran’s Nuclear Impasse, June 20, 2006

http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Hearing&Hearing_id=2f6b3ebc-f506-4a8b-b3dd-6f25f8234fcf

(d) Post 1: Revolutionary Guards to Young Basijis (Farsi): http://world.yjc.ir/NewsDesc.aspx?newsid=373455 

(e) Post 2: Special forces division of Hezbollah supporting Ayatollah Khameini (Farsi): http://ammariyon.ir/fa/pages/?cid=2404

(f) Post 3: US based website (Farsi): http://www.sarkhat.com/fa/group/tzdgjea/%EF%BB%BF 

(g) Heritage Foundation Citation - Helle Bale (English): http://blog.heritage.org/?p=45496 

(h) Confederation of Iranian Students: www.cistudents.org 

(i) Confederation of Iranian Students - Chapters: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=126063460319 

(j) Selected Quote from Imam Rauf: http://www.analyst-network.com/article.php?art_id=3453

(k) Cordoba Initiative advise to Obama administration to refrain from interfering in Iranian national politics, as a revolution erupted inside Iran: http://www.cordobainitiative.org/?q=content/what-president-obama-should-say-about-irans-election

(l) Remarks by Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counter-terrorism John Brennan at CSIS

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-assistant-president-homeland-security-and-counterterrorism-john-brennan-csi

Definition - “Fitna” (English): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitna_(word)

Definition - Taqiyya (English): http://www.meforum.org/2538/taqiyya-islam-rules-of-war

The question of military engagement against Iran ~ My comments to Tehran Bureau

A number of months ago, I had an email exchange with a journalist at Tehran Bureau, Frontline, PBS, regarding the rape crisis in Iran. As a sudden shift, I was asked about military strategy against Iran and any conservative affiliations. ABS Community Research, Inc is concerned with human rights protections, coalition building, and anti-corruption. I am not sure where this question came from. Given a number of Iranians both inside the US and inside Iran had shared their opinions with me since June 2009 demonstrations, my answer was a synopsis of their opinions. Of note, Iran belongs to the Iranian people, not Americans, not Israel, not Palestine, nor any western country. It is my firm stance that any government's action in any form be taken with the Iranian citizens, nothing less, and nothing against them.

Military Engagement Against Iran - My Comments to Tehran Bureau

by Velma Anne Ruth on Tuesday, May 18, 2010 at 1:19pm

Through communications with multiple Iranian-American groups, I have been presented with a broad range of perspectives concerning military engagement. None of which include pre-emptive strike on Iran, most especially in a manner as Iraq – this is out of line. However, as Iran is engaging in nuclear development without fear of the US, rhetoric from those like Sen. McCain is a message to reflect that yes – the US has been making idle threats for a long time, why should Iran be afraid? 

In general discussion, consensus I hear from Iranian-Americans with backing leadership support is:

1) Iran belongs to the Iranian people. Any shift in governance is ultimately in their hands, as it very well should be.

2) No one wants a repeat of 1979, and certainly the 1950s did not bode well for Iran either. For the 21st century, US dominance over Iranian government is a presumed failure.

3) Who the Iranian people want to lead them should be up to their vote, solely their vote. This is a core human right that was unjustifiably stolen from them, and has lead to increased violence.

4) Regardless of what Ahmadinejad wants, there are two dueling views among Iranians: reform vs. secular democracy. It is undetermined which is preferred by the majority of Iranian people, both in the country and outside. While it is rumored that secular democracy is being called for by the Green movement inside Iran, this is a matter of political preference; like Republican v Democrat, or Libertarian v. Communist. Due to communications challenges imposed by the Iranian Cyber Army, an accurate poll is virtually impossible to obtain without intelligence support.

5) The concern over reform is similar to “regime change” concerns. By merely replacing Ahmadinejad with a new leader, that the government will continue atrocities inside prisons, on the streets, in international markets, and maintain funding terrorist organizations. 

6) The US government does not necessarily support any leader for Iran, not Mousavi, not Reza Pahlavi, no one. It is not up to the US, nor should it be because it is not our vote – it is not up to Iranian-Americans or non-Iranian Americans to determine the future of Iran. It is not our land.

7) Any pre-emptive strike is a potential repeat of Iraq, and is not appropriate, nor preferred – most assuredly because it would invite WWIII, which is the last thing that the global community needs in a dire economy anyway

8) Current legislation supporting democracy (attached brief) highlights US federal government funding opportunities to enable the Iranian people to engage their own movements towards a human rights driven, constitutional environment. This potential funding is tied to sanctions bills, is a potential gateway for military engagement, and maybe misused as such. The Iranian people may need resources in order to survive attacks against the regime inside the country. During the Bush Administration, they made many outlandish attempts that defeated the intended purpose of the original student movement, by exploiting the process, at minimum. The Iranian people are encouraged to present their views on democracy independently to Congress, regardless of any opposing positions or war mongering which may be dominating the Hill.

9) Lastly, minimal military engagement is considered a last resort, if and only if absolutely necessary. I have heard more conservative Iranian-Americans express gratitude for US military presence in the Gulf and around Iranian borders. But beyond that, they want the US to not be playing rhetorical games and to be serious about supporting the Iranian people. The current state of intelligence is that there is a grave disconnect between intel and the Iranian people. If this is a bridge that can be built, then military engagement can be deterred more expediently. 

In the midst of discussions with Iranian-American organizations, with whom I speak with 95%, and leadership 5%; the community is seeking to form a coalition of groups who oppose the current regime, in whatever form they take. Though these groups calling for a coalition are predominantly pro-secular democracy, pro-human rights, pro-America, and pro-Israel; collaboration is also open to reformists. Everyone has a shared goal of peace and protections for the Iranian people, but they want to merge resources in order to be successful above and beyond any government intervention.

Please see the facebook note for feedback from Iranians and American supporters. Please feel free to make a friends request, and refer to this blog in the request. 

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150188805230424