|
By M. Parvin
January 6,
2020
On June 28, 1981, seventy-two high
officials of Islamic Regime in Iran (IRI), including
Chief Justice ayatollah Beheshti who was the second
most powerful figure after Khomeini died in the
bombing at a party meeting in Tehran. These killings
were followed by the assignation of President Rajai
and Prime Minister Javad Bahonar in a meeting of the
Supreme Defense Council on August 30, 1981 [1].
The system of terror governing Iran
was not affected by the assignation of all these
influential figures at all. They have continued the
repression of the freedom-loving Iranian, have
expanded their influence in the region, and have
survived the threats and sanctions by western
countries.
Killing Ghasem Soleimani, the head
of Quds force and deputy head of Iraq paramilitary
forces by Trump's order on January 3, 2020, will not
have any effect on the extent of the regime's
capabilities and terrorist activities. Islamic
Regime is not short of terrorists like Soleimani.
Esmail Ghaani, the Iranian general who replaced him,
has already pledged to take revenge. His threat was
followed by Iraq's parliament vote to expel all
American troops from Iraq. Moving the U.S. forces
out of Iraq was one of Soleimani's primary goals.
In short, it does not improve the
behavior of this bloody regime at all. On the
contrary, it will give the Islamic Regime the excuse
to repress the Iranian opposition harsher, divide
the western countries more in their foreign policy
approaches, and make more violent actions wherever
and whenever possible and get more credit from the
terrorist groups all over the world for confronting
the U.S.
The U.S. assassination has also
benefited IRI immensely inside Iran. In mid-November
2019, scattered protests over an increase in
gasoline prices quickly spread into one of the
biggest challenges to Iran's clerical rulers since
the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The unrest in several
cities reached the capital Tehran soon, with people
calling for an end to the Islamic Regime. The exact
number of people killed is not yet verified. Based
on the information provided to Reuters by two
Iranian officials, about 1,500 people were killed
during unrest that started on November 15 [2].
The number reported by the Human Rights
Organizations is smaller.
As a result of the Soleimani's
assassination, the death of the protesters that
could escalate more massive action has not only come
to rest but has pulled at least some of them to show
their concern about the Trump's war threat. None of
these protesters wouldn't care for Soleimani's death
if it did not raise the possibility of a deadly war.
And, this is another big gift given to the bloody
regime in Iran by Trump.
Trump's gift to the Islamic Regime
goes is countless. There are several groups,
including AIC (American Iranian Council) and NIAC
(National Iranian American Council) in the U.S. that
have been rooting and lobbying for unconditional
recognition of the Islamic Regime [3].
These groups that have used their financial
resources to influence the U.S. media and
politicians have now found a valuable opportunity to
escalate their effort. As usual, they are doing it
under the banner of "war or peace." The misinformed
media and ignorant politicians have also fallen into
this trap. And last but not least, interest-driven
companies represented by politicians have always
been for the "war or peace" scenario because either
way, it would enhance their trades with IRI.
The uninformed American people who
are naturally rallying for the "peace," are
practically supporting what the lobby regimes
advocate. They hear that since "war" is terrible and
does not serve their interest, they should root for
peace with IRI, meaning closing their eyes to all
its human rights abuses against Iranians.
AS U.S. media is reporting the
assassination of Soleimani's aftermath in Iran, we
read and hear that "Iranians" have come to streets
to mourn his death. This assertion is false. The
majority of the Iranians are against the entire
regime and all its members. However, this does not
mean that they want war. They are wise enough to
learn their lessons from the disastrous results of
military invasions in many struggling countries
including, Iraq, Egypt, and Libya, to know that
military attacks by the foreigners cannot bring
democracy to Iran.
So, yes, they are against the war
but are not crying for the death of Suleiman's
death. Those who are doing so are only the
supporters of Hezbollah, Islamic Military Guard
Corps, Basij, Guds force, who are not the majority
of Iranians. Thus, the media approach that wrongly
describes the reactions of Iranians is giving boosts
to IRI and is another significant gift to dictators
as a result of this assassination.
The U.S. politicians that are
currently against this attack and future military
actions do not offer any practical options and are
essentially helping the survival of this regime by
vaguely appealing to peace and negotiations. Based
on their record, this means giving full recognition
to this regime and removing all the sanctions just
by placing some limits on its atomic activities.
This approach has been taken by both Republicans and
Democrats. The only difference has been that
Republicans have been using the threat of military
actions and Democrats negotiations to achieve a
mutual gold. What has always been forgotten has been
Iranians whose struggle for democracy has been
demolished by the IRI. Of course, human rights have
been in conversation and on the negotiation tables
like a decorating vase of flowers but have never had
any practical role whatsoever in the negotiation
offers or threats.
There is a much more viable option
in dealing with the religious dictatorship in Iran
that has been referred to as "Third Option" [4].
The third option is empowering
Iranian people to overthrow this regime by applying
a smart sanction. Smart sanction has been exercised
successfully in countries such as South Africa does
not require any foreign interference or military
intervention. Executive Director of the Human Rights
Watch, Kenneth Roth testified before the U.S. Senate
Task Force on Economic Sanctions, on September 8,
1998, that eventually resulted in a smart sanction
imposed on South Africa [5].
Smart sanction deprives the
terrorist regimes of easy access to military
equipment, spying tools, etc. It does not apply any
significant economic pressure on Iranians, and even
if it does, to some degree, it would be acceptable
to the freedom-loving Iranians in Iran. A smart
sanction will empower their disobedience fight to
overthrow the dictatorship and replace it with a
democratic system. It is a long process but is the
only way that excludes the war-recognition" option
and can bring peace to Iran [6].
The condition of stopping the human
rights violation should be placed as another
condition along with the atomic condition for
removing the smart sanction. The Islamic regime will
most probably won't accept this condition. However,
it will eventually pay for it by being forced to
yielding to the civil disobedient fight of the
empowered Iranians.
Thus, if Trump knew a little about
the nature of the regime ruling in Iran, he would
know that killing a terrorist would not stop
terrorism. Of course, it can disturb the impeachment
process!
References:
1.
Assassination of Mohammad Ali Rajai Iran's
President, New York Times
2.
Report by Reuters
3.
Using "Human Rights" to better serve a dictatorship,
by M. Parvin
4.
The Clergy Challenge, by M. Parvin
5.
Excerpts testimony of Kenneth Roth, HRW Executive
Director before U.S. Senate
6.
How to End the Era of Terror in Iran, by M. Parvin
|
