Mission for Establishment
of Human Rights in Iran

(MEHR)

A critical review of the U.S.
policy towards Iran
and an alternative option proposed as

“Third Option”

Regime Change by Iranians

(Mohammad Parvin)

BACKGROUND:

The new U.S. policy started with the announcement on May
31, 2006 that the U.S. is prepared to join other countries in holding direct
talks with Iran on its nuclear program on the condition that Iran first stop
disputed nuclear activities.

The U.S.
ambassador to the U.N., John Bolton, said a few days earlier that if the
mullahs abandon efforts to enrich uranium, they can remain in power.  It seems that the nuclear weapons have
bought leverage for a terrorist regime and that the Islamic Regime’s
policy of intimidation and humiliation of the U.S. is paying off.  Although the west is ready to choose
the Islamic Regime (IR) over the Iranian people and has come up with an
incentive package, IR wants more.

The Islamic
Regime has denied the basic rights of Iranian people since its inception in
1979.  Under the religious
dictatorship of IR, Iranians have not been able to freely speak, write, vote,
dress, pray, and love. Those who have tried to exercise these rights have
paid for it dearly.

Human Rights
violations of IR have been well documented by many International HR
organizations such as the Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, as
well as many Iranian groups and the U.S. State Department. Therefore, I have
assumed that readers are aware of these facts. Unfortunately, not much
attention has been given to the biggest crime of the Islamic Regime. In the
summer of 1988, thousands of political prisoners were massacred by the
Islamic Regime. Due to the high degree of secrecy involved, the exact number
of victims is not known but estimates are as high as 30,000. So far over 5,000
victims have been identified and their names are posted on MEHR’s
website. IR has been continuously committing crimes against Iranians. As
appeasing policies are shaping up, the Islamic Regime has intensified the
policy of repression, intimidation, and persecution.

Young people have
been arrested for listening to banned music.  Public transport workers of Tehran who only wanted
to form their union and present their economic demands are brutally hammered.  Student gatherings are attacked.  University Professors are forced to
retire or are fired.  Peaceful
demonstrations by women are brutally attacked. And once again, another
Iranian woman has been sentenced to death by the barbaric practice of public
stoning.  On June 28, 2006, a court in the northwestern Iranian city of Urmia sentenced Malak Ghorbany to death for committing adultery.

POSSIBLE SENARIOS:

Some believe the U.S. policy hasn’t changed
and this is just a tactical position.
In my opinion, being tactical or otherwise, it will have disastrous
consequences for the Iranian democracy movement.

Let’s examine the possible scenarios:  The Islamic Regime will eventually
accept the U.S. offer if
all its conditions are met by the U.S. These conditions include the
lifting of sanctions, removal from the list of terrorist regimes, the release
of the frozen assets, acceptance in the WTO, more aid from the World Bank,
and above all a guarantee that there will be no regime change on the U.S.
foreign policy horizon. As part of this guarantee, the Islamic Regime demands
the extradition of the leaders of Mojahedin to Iran.

If the strategy of the Islamic Regime and its Iranian
and non-Iranian lobbyists work and their conditions are met, the “axis
of evil” will be brought to the world community.  There will be nothing more devastating
to the democracy movement in Iran.  Those who struggle for a secular democracy
in Iran
will find themselves betrayed and facing a brutal regime that is now formally
supported by the entire world.

What will happen if this scenario of establishing friendship
with the Islamic Regime does not satisfy them and fails? The U.S.
has shown the world community that it has exhausted all the peaceful avenues.
Then what?

Referral of the Islamic Regime to the Security Council
and all it can do if it happens and if successful, will force the brutal
regime to accept the incentives that were once rejected.  What an achievement!  A brutal terrorist regime will also
join the world community under this scenario.  This is again the betrayal of
freedom-loving Iranians.

The other option may be a military intervention of some
kind. Iraq’s experience
has shown us that it is much more difficult to capture Iran and change the Islamic
Regime by military strike.  In
the event of a military strike by the U.S.
or Israel,
the IR would consider themselves victims of aggression, attracting the
sympathy of the world community and crushing the Iranian opposition harder
than ever.  By standing against U.S.
aggression, they would become the champion of the people in the region,
gaining the greater support of terrorist groups, and allowing the Islamic
Regime to expand its hegemony in the region.

This scenario is also a tragedy.  Like all other scenarios, the human
rights and dignity of the Iranians and their fight against a religious
dictatorship are completely ignored and will have a devastating blow to all
Iranian dissidents and freedom fighters. These extreme policies of either
attacking Iran
or establishing friendly relations with the Islamic regime are both against
the interests of the Iranian people and the entire world.

How have these extreme policies been formed?

This black and white foreign policy has been mainly
adopted and dictated by the Islamic Regime, its Iranian lobby groups in the U.S. and Europe, EU state, and certain factions
of the U.S.
administration and policy makers. Having utilized the rhetorical
“Regime Change” stand of the U.S.
administration, these groups and individuals have masterfully portrayed it as
the U.S.
intention to resolve the conflict with IR by force. By manipulating the
current anti-war sentiment of the public, they have promoted the other
extreme policy that advocates the friendly relationship with the Islamic
Regime.

U.S. WORDS VS. ACTIONS

The U.S.
rhetorical stand of “regime change” that is manipulated to create
the black and white policy never manifested itself in any meaningful action against
the interests of the IR.  Let’s
examine this:

·
The so-called sanctions were ineffective
not only because the E.U didn’t participate, but also because many U.S. companies such as Halliburton and GE were
dealing with the IR to the extent that Halliburton had an office in Tehran until a few
months ago. The U.S.
market is full of Iranian goods.  Apart
from huge amounts of carpet, pistachio, and Caviar, many other items are
imported from Iran.
It should be noted that the IR and its financial institutions such as
Deprived Foundation have a hand in every deal and this has made a mockery of
the existing sanction.

·    On diplomatic grounds, although
the U.S. does not have a formal relationship with the IR since the U.S.
Embassy hostage taking twenty-five years ago, the back door diplomacy has
been under way and the terrorist regime has been legitimized in so many ways
including being consulted regarding the Afghanistan and Iraq situation.

In
spite of the U.S.
“Anti-Terrorism Act” that considers any sort of association with
the terrorists a crime, the Iranian and American lobby groups and individuals
have been openly rooting for the friendly relations with the Islamic Regime
that is on the State Department list of the terrorists.  The American Iranian Council has been
on the forefront of such efforts and has continuously promoted the
high-ranking members of the Islamic Regime in the U.S. The sponsors of this
organization listed on its website include all major U.S. oil companies.

Under the disguise of
the cultural exchange, the IR has formed many meetings, conferences, and
exhibitions in the U.S.
and operates TV and Radio Stations in the U.S.

One of IR’s
affiliated institutions called Alavi Foundation, is publicly active in New York despite its
clear ties to IR.  One of its
Directors, Hadi Nejad Hosseinian is the IR ambassador to the United Nations.  Alavi has a satellite TV network in
the U.S. known as Aftab
Television, which broadcasts state-run television program from Tehran.  Aftab is controlled through a NY
agency, Cina Productions.

The
slogan of “Standing with the Iranian people” stated by many
in the U.S.
administration, does not exist as a policy.  MEHR who has been actively
involved in defense of political prisoners and asylum seekers has tried
in vain for months to persuade the U.S. authorities to grant some sort
of visa to a known political prisoner whose situation has been addressed
in the State Department and Amnesty International reports.  What sort of standing with the
Iranians is this?

The State
Department grant offered to the Iranian dissidents is conditional.  It is contingent upon changes in U.S.
policy and can stop any moment.  This
makes any serious planning impossible and as a result prevents credible
individuals and groups to commit to a program that its grantors are
non-committed.  A big chunk of the
State Department grant is going to the Radio and TV programming through Voice
of America and Radio Farda that have been promoting the lobbyists and
supporters of the Islamic Regime, such as Houshang Amir Ahmadi who heads AIC
and was one of the candidates in recent so-called Presidential election in
Iran, as well as many other so-called reformists.

FINANCING
IR’S TERRORISM:

By dealing with a government infamous for its
notorious opposition to all principles of Human Rights and its outright and
active support of the International terrorism within and beyond its borders,
the Western countries will be practically financing its terrorist activities
as well as its nuclear program

According to the statistics published in the
Oxford Analytical and reported in Iranian press (Iran-e Farda), more than 50%
of Iran’s
economy is run and owned by an organization called "the Deprived
Foundation" (Bonyaad-e Mostaz-afaan) that is fully exempted from audit
and taxation.  This organization
has 7 branches in the areas of Trade, Agriculture, Industry and Mines, Transportation,
Import and Export.  Each of these
branches acts like a ministry.  A
1986 statistics indicates that the assets of this foundation includes 140
industrial complex, 64 mines, 2,786 pieces of agricultural land, 230 import
and export companies, 90 movie theaters, 3 newspapers, 200 loan offices, 2
insurance companies and several shipping and airplane companies. It has
150,000 employees, 22% of concrete, 28% of textile, 45% of the sodas, 28% of
the plastic products, 25% of the sugar production, and is controlled by this
foundation.

This organization has a hand in every
financial deal and does not answer to any elected body in the country.  It is actually a state within a state
with clerical backing.  There is
no guarantee that any foreign aid will ever reach the needy people.  It only subsidizes the terrorist
activities of the regime.  There
are many more similar organizations including the Bonyad-e Alawi, the
Bonyad-e Shahid (Martyers’ Foundation), the Bonyad-e Maskan (Housing
Foundation), the Bonyad-e 15th Khordad, the Imam Khomeini Relief
and Aid Organization, and the Jiha-e Sazandeghi (Reconstruction Crusade).

THIRD OPTION:

The natural outcome of this type of “regime
change” and “standing with the Iranians” combined with the
black and white policy is what we are witnessing. The U.S. is humiliating itself to
prove that it is not for military option.  To do this, it has fallen into the
other trap; the trap of making friendly relations with one of the most brutal
dictatorships of our time.

The Islamic Regime is a danger to life and security of
not only the Iranians but the entire world.  Once again, the world is witnessing
how Mullahs are involved in sponsoring terrorists groups such as Hezbollah in
Lebanon.  This proves
again that this system of terror cannot change and must be removed.  This task cannot be achieved by
foreign invasion.

There is a third option that if adopted, can eliminate
the danger of the Islamic regime. The third option basically argues that the
Iranian people are capable of changing the regime if the IR is not supported
by the West, especially the U.S.

One of the main reasons that many Iranian people who are
against the regime are not active is that they are clever: They evaluate
their balance of power against their enemy. They see that they are facing not
only a brutal regime that is heavily armed, but an entire world that is
falling over itself to support their oppressor.

The terrorist activities of the Islamic Regime cannot be
stopped by making promises. It is written into the constitution that
fundamentalist Islamic ideology should conquer the world.  The severity of this is apparently not
understood by the West.  The
Islamic regime believes that there is a war between militant Islam and the
rest of the world.  This regime
feeds its supporters by using this ideological animosity.  By adopting this "god-given"
mandate arbitrarily interpreted from the Koran the Islamic regime has become
the biggest sponsor of terrorism.

ELEMENTS OF
POSSIBLE U.S.
SUPPORT:

Giving up the black and white policy and adopting the
third option will come at no cost to the American people. It only asks the U.S.
to stop recognizing this regime, making financial deals with it, and
legitimizing it. (OR say…) It only asks the US to stop recognizing this regime,
end all financial dealings and not legitimize it.

Obviously, the determining criterion in shaping
international policies is political interest. The question is whether there
is a policy to satisfy both the interests of the Iranians as well as the Americans.  I believe there is.  There is a policy that can help bring
democracy to Iran as well
as peace and security to the U.S.
and the entire world.  I believe
that the U.S.
and the international community should explore the third option; one of tough
policy against the criminal leaders and nonviolent support for a budding
democratic movement.

I believe this policy should contain certain elements to
show real support for those who struggle for a secular democracy in Iran.
This support should not stop at words
but be manifested in certain actions including:

Acknowledgement
of the fact that a majority of Iranians want a secular democratic regime
and are against the entirety of the Islamic Regime, its constitution,
and any form of religious rule in the state of Iran.

·    Imposing smart and targeted sanctions
against the Islamic Regime of Iran that would only hurt the Islamic Regime
and its financial institutions such as “Bonyads” that based on a recent
report by Patrick Clawson controls more than 60 percent of the Iran
economy.  These sanctions should
not have any loopholes and must be strictly adhered to, unlike the current
policy which allowed many American companies such as Halliburton and General
Electric to deal with the Islamic regime.  The U.S. should encourage other
western governments to join the sanctions against the Islamic regime and end
economic aid to those governments that help the Islamic Regime.

Reducing diplomatic relations with the Islamic
Regime to the lowest possible level.

Applying the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act
indiscriminately by not allowing IR lobby groups such as AIC and some U.S.
policy makers to legitimize a terrorist regime. Stop all events formed
by the Iranian and American lobbyists to promote the Islamic Regime
authorities under the disguise of cultural or educational exchange.

Providing broadcasting facilities to knowledgeable
Iranians who have studied the philosophy and practice of nonviolent
actions and civil disobedience so that they can share their knowledge
with Iranians inside Iran.
This will lead to devising a realistic
strategy that if implemented, will empower the people of Iran to change the dictatorship in Iran
with minimal outside interference.

Removing
obstacles for the Iranians who seek justice for the victims of the
Islamic Regime through International avenues such as Convention Against
Torture.

Forming a
Tribunal through the Security Council to try the authorities of the
Islamic Regime for crimes committed against humanity.

The Iranian people can do it.  They can change this regime on their
own and by doing so bring
peace and freedom to Iran
and security to the whole world.  Given
the opportunity, Iranian activists can learn the theory and practice of civil
disobedience and nonviolent action, devise a proper strategy, mobilize the
masses and oust the oppressive rulers.  No outside interference is required. In
fact, such foreign interference would be counterproductive and ineffectual.  It can be and should be done only by
Iranians.  The best way to help
the people of Iran
is to not legitimize or support the Islamic Regime under any circumstances.

MEHR

P.O.
Box 2037, P.V.P., CA 90274

Tel:
(310) 377- 4590 ; Fax: (310) 377-3103

E-mail: [email-masked] URL: http://mehr.org