Observing Iran (catch all historical thread)

[GorTex6]

WSJ.com(subscription required)

Mr. Pahlavi is so focused on the future of Iran that he prefers not to spend time on the past. Even so, when I ask what might be different today if the Iranian revolution had never taken place, he points to a chain of events that seem even worse with hindsight than they did at the time: "The Russians probably would not have invaded Afghanistan the way they did, and Saddam Hussein would not have attacked Iran. . . . From Sudan to everywhere else you can think of, there have been acts of terrorism, attacks on apartments in Khobar, the blowing up of Marine barracks in Beirut. It's been all over the place. If you look at the world the way it was before this regime took over, we didn't have any of these problems."

And yet a solution to all of this is percolating up today, Mr. Pahlavi says, and it's coming from the Iranian people. In fact, he insists, in dealing with a belligerent Tehran, "there is only one thing that the outside world can do, and that is to tell the regime: 'We are serious about supporting the people who are inside Iran who are against you.' That is the only thing that will make Mr. Khamenei [Iran's supreme leader] and everybody stand down. Because nothing else ruffles them. The only thing they are really scared of are the people themselves."

Peaceful revolutions from within have worked before, so why, he asks, isn't the West investing in the Iranian people -- "the same way they supported so many movements in Eastern Europe that ultimately brought down communist governments that were under Moscow's umbrella?" Dissidents are everywhere, in the universities, workplaces, the conventional armed forces, he adds: "There are thousands of cells . . . each trying to bring as much pressure as they can -- but with very limited resources. Imagine the cumulative weight of all these resistance groups in a civil disobedience act -- nonviolent, we don't believe in violent change -- that could begin sustained pressure to the point of paralyzing the system until it would collapse."

Moral leverage.....

[Jedburgh]

Covert support of opposition groups within Iran needs to be approached with care, as I mentioned in a different thread. Aside from the issue of legitimacy, there is also the hard fact that the Iranian opposition is not only fragmented, but there is a great deal of dissent on goals and approaches within and among the various opposition factions.

The son-of-shah is not exactly a disinterested speaker, but his support exists mainly in exile and he is only a figurehead for what is virtually the weakest faction in-country. As much as the vast majority of Iranians dislike Mullahcracy, they aren't exactly eager for a re-run of the Shah. Giving him much attention would simply be a repeat of the stupidity exhibited with Chalabi in the run-up to OIF.

[Stu-6]

I agree it seems like we have been down that road before both with Chalabi and a few decades ago with the Shah. Hopefully we have learned something from our own history.

[GorTex6]

I agree it seems like we have been down that road before both with Chalabi and a few decades ago with the Shah. Hopefully we have learned something from our own history.

We also covertly supported the Ayatollah and assisted in his rise to power, destablizing the Soviet puppet in Kabul and luring the bear to invade Afghanistan.

[Stu-6]

US support for the Ayatollah? Supporting his rise to power? I am intrigued please elaborate.

[SWJED]

US support for the Ayatollah? Supporting his rise to power? I am intrigued please elaborate.

Me too. This should be good.

[GorTex6]

Brzezinski mentioned it during an interview with a French reporter. Look it up yourself if it is so intriguing.