Blog

Blog

Women are leading the revolution to bring down Iran’s regime

by
written by

Women have been the main target of the Iranian regime — now they’re leading the revolution to bring it down

New York Post     |     By Maryam Rajavi     |     November 27, 2022

Brave Iranian women, supported by a generation of young men, educated and knowing their inalienable rights, have openly and ferociously rejected the brutal religious dictatorship of Ali Khamenei and all his loyalists and apologists, in pursuit of justice and equal rights.

They are organized, inspired, self-sacrificing and ready to bring about fundamental change: the regime’s downfall and the establishment of democratic rule that will ensure their life, liberty and prosperity.

Their courageous stand on the streets of almost every city and town in Iran has been met by the welcome support of all of society and the awe and respect of the free world.

Twenty-two-year-old Mahsa Amini’s tragic death in the custody of Tehran’s morality police triggered an explosion of grievances over injustices our people have suffered for more than four decades. The world is witnessing the fruition of a democratic revolution that Ruhollah Khomeini denied 43 years ago when, under a pretense of Islam, he imposed a theocratic dictatorship on the Iranian people.

Iranians, especially women, are ending a monstrous religious fascist experiment that defiled Islam as well as Iran’s culture and civilization by committing the most egregious and inhumane crimes in modern times.

Women have been the main target of the regime’s oppression and discrimination — and thus possess the greatest potential to confront the regime. They have also learned by experience that their rights cannot be realized as long as this regime reigns. They are, therefore, the force for change and rebirth of our nation.

The protesters are using slogans to communicate their aspirations to the world. “Death to Khamenei!” “Death to the oppressor, be it the shah or the [supreme] leader!” “Freedom, Freedom, Freedom!” “Death to the principle of velayat-e faqih [absolute clerical rule]!”

In the first months after the revolution, the mullahs’ regime sought to impose compulsory veiling with its own slogan: “Either the veil or a hit on the head.” Mujahedin-e Khalq women who wore the veil were on the front lines of the women’s huge protest in March 1979. I was there.

In 1981, when our people revolted against religious fascism, they were met with brute force. Many high-school and university students were summarily executed the day after a half-million-strong peaceful demonstration in Tehran, without regard to judicial norms or proper identification. Mass executions intensified in subsequent weeks and months, at times with hundreds executed every night.

Four decades of horrors and massacres, injustices and cruelties have ensued.

Today, the Iranian people have not risen to reform an irreformable and illegitimate regime but rather to end it. They rose in peaceful protest but were met with bullets, torture and executions. In an uneven conflict with heavily armed forces of suppression, they are rightfully resisting with what they have, with rocks, their honor, blood, sweat and tears.

The free world must support the democratic revolution for which my empty-handed compatriots are laying down their lives. When inalienable and God-given rights cannot be secured through peaceful means in the face of a brutal dictatorship lacking any legitimacy, it is incumbent upon women and men of honor to secure them through organized, responsible and self-sacrificing struggle by any means within the bounds of internationally recognized covenants — such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that recognizes the right “to have recourse as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression.”

The United States Declaration of Independence, too, holds that “it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish” a government that is destructive to its citizens’ life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Faced with ruthless violence from well-armed security forces exhorted to show no mercy and a regime that seeks no less than their wholesale massacre to continue its control and enslavement of the citizenry, there is only one recourse of last resort. As Americans know, freedom does not come free.

The Iranian resistance will continue until the religious dictatorship’s downfall and the establishment of a free, secular, democratic and non-nuclear Iran, in peace and good mutual relations with the world.

Women are at the center of this resistance, and their role in the political leadership as well as economic, cultural and intellectual life will be guaranteed by their struggle. Above and beyond their absolute right to decide what they wear and how to live, they are at the forefront of change.

The Iranian people should not be alone at such a defining moment. It is time for the West to shun the appeasement of the theocracy and support the democratic revolution by recognizing the resistance’s right to defend itself against the brutality of the regime by any means possible.

We’ve always welcomed the support and participation of all Iranians in overthrowing this regime, rejecting dictatorships of the past and establishing a free Iran through popular sovereignty and the ballot box. The path to reclaim our rights and rebuild our future has been charted, and thanks in great part to the country’s women, a free Iran will soon join the free world.

Maryam Rajavi is the President-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran.

https://nypost.com/2022/11/27/women-have-been-the-main-target-of-the-iranian-regime-now-theyre-leading-the-revolution-to-bring-it-down/

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Women rising up after decades of Iran regime’s oppression. They need the world’s support

by
written by

Fort Worth Star-Telegram     |     BY HOMEIRA HESAMI      |      OCTOBER 13, 2022

A few weeks after it began, the scale and intensity of Iran’s uprising are tangibly diminishing an already weak regime in Tehran. Women, who for more than four decades bore the brunt of the mullahs’ inequities and misogyny, are braving bullets and demanding a similarly unprecedented response from Western powers. Choosing the path of least resistance, the free world has typically been ambivalent.

But courageous actions of women, brutal murders of the innocent and the persistence of Iranian resistance promise to change that calculus. In mid-September, as embers of anger smoldered below the ashes of oppression in Iran, a group of hard-working Texans who are members of the Iranian-American community, spent a week in New York to protest against the expected appearance of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi at the United Nations. This predator actually did address the U.N. — only to badmouth democratic values and make a mockery of the rule of law.

Thousands of miles away that week, agents of the mullahs’ regime in Iran bludgeoned to death an innocent young woman named Mahsa Amini, who was arrested for improperly wearing a headscarf. That ignited the protests, which grew with each passing day — as did our disgust at the powers inside and outside the U.N. headquarters who catered to the murderer among them.

Just days earlier, 52 members of Congress had written a bipartisan letter to the Biden administration, trying to prevent Raisi from entering the U.S. Seven of them are Texans, including Rep. Ronny Jackson, a Republican whose district includes part of Wise County. “Given Ebrahim Raisi’s record of supporting terrorism and violating human rights, he should not be afforded the privilege to step onto American soil,” the lawmakers wrote. “We cannot turn a blind eye to perpetrators of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights and cruel regimes that endanger both their people and Americans.

” The protests, which demand regime change in Iran, broke out near Amini’s hometown of Saqqez immediately after her death. Today, demonstrations continue in more than 170 cities in all 31 provinces of Iran. The regime’s attempt to depict the unrest as misplaced outrage or foreign “infiltration” has not tamed the uprising. Nor has the killing of at least 400 protesters and arrests of more than 20,000 people, according to an Iranian women’s group.

The fact that these protests have persisted speaks to the people’s motivation for change.

This time around, the main focus is the end of the regime itself, as demonstrated by the slogan “Death to the dictator!” Sensing this, the regime used force. To us Iranian Americans, it is obvious that this confrontation is mutually existential. Moved by short-sighted economic aims, the international community has typically chosen to equivocate or ignore previous Iran uprisings. The considerable worldwide support today suggests that’s changing. Across the world, people are rallying in solidarity with Iran’s aspiration for a democratic, secular, and non-nuclear republic. The latter is coincidentally also outlined in a bipartisan resolution cosponsored by 257 House members, including 29 Texans.

Conversely, the regime’s repressive instincts are on display. This confrontation will not cease until Tehran’s rulers are held accountable for four decades of carnage, inequity, murder, and terrorism.

If the free world continues to dodge its responsibility, participants in the uprising acknowledge the risks in their collective chants of “We will fight, we will die, we will reclaim Iran.” Video from protests confirms on-the-street executions of protesters by repressive authorities. Western governments and relevant international bodies bear a moral obligation to clearly voice support for the Iranian people’s right to self-determination and democratic regime change.

https://www.star-telegram.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/other-voices/article267233487.html

 

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Will Anyone Punish Iran for Its Murderous Campaign?

by
written by

NEW YORK TIMES     |     BRET STEPHENS     |     AUG. 23, 2022

A lot has been written about the broader meaning of the attack this month on Salman Rushdie, for which a Muslim religious fanatic has been charged with attempted murder. Not enough has been said about the evil of the regime that presumably inspired the deed and so many others like it — or of what it says of the wisdom of trying to strike a nuclear deal with it.

The Islamic Republic of Iran did not take responsibility for the murder attempt on Rushdie. But Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s 1989 fatwa against him for “The Satanic Verses” remains in effect, and in 2007 Rushdie reported that every Feb. 14 he receives a “sort of Valentine’s card” from Iran recalling its promise to kill him. Following this month’s attack, Iranian state media called it “divine retribution.”Nor is Tehran being discreet about similar attempts being made on American and European soil against some of its other enemies, literary or political.

On Aug. 10, the Justice Department unveiled criminal charges against Shahram Poursafi, a member of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, for trying to orchestrate an assassination attempt against former national security adviser John Bolton. Axios’s Mike Allen reported the same day that Iran had put out a $1 million bounty for the murder of former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

In July, the target was Masih Alinejad, the Iranian American journalist and human-rights activist, whose Brooklyn home was visited last month by a man later arrested with a loaded AK-47 in his car. The regime was also behind an elaborate earlier kidnapping attempt against Alinejad.

Last year, a Belgian court convicted Vienna-based Iranian diplomat Assadollah Assadi, along with three Iranian Belgian accomplices, in a plot to bomb a 2018 gathering of Iranian opposition figures in Paris. In July the Belgian Parliament ratified a prisoner-exchange treaty with Iran after Tehran arrested a Belgian national in Iran on espionage charges, though a Belgian judge has barred an exchange.

Also last year, the Iranian American writer Roya Hakakian disclosed that she had been warned by the F.B.I. that she, too, was a target for Iranian agents in the United States. Hakakian is the author of “Assassins of the Turquoise Palace,” the stunning account of Iran’s 1992 assassination of four Iranian opposition figures in Berlin’s Mykonos restaurant, and of the long struggle for justice that followed.

On it goes:

In November, Norwegian media disclosed that a former first secretary to the Iranian Embassy in Oslo was accused by authorities of being the mastermind of a 1993 assassination attempt against William Nygaard, Rushdie’s publisher there. In 2020 Iran executed journalist and dissident Ruhollah Zam after he had been lured to Iraq and then handed over to Iran. That same year, in Dubai, Iran kidnapped Jamshid Sharmahd, a German citizen and California resident. He is now at serious risk of execution. In 2018 Denmark foiled an effort by Iranian intelligence to assassinate a dissident there. In 2011, Iranian agents plotted to kill the Saudi ambassador to the United States by bombing the Cafe Milano in Washington.

“The assassination needed to go forward, even if doing so would cause mass casualties,” the plot leader instructed his accomplices, according to court filings.

The point of this abbreviated list is that the stabbing attack on Rushdie, even if it was only inspired by Tehran rather than directed by it, was not unique. On the contrary, it was all too typical.

The Islamic Republic has been carrying out a campaign of assassination, kidnapping and intimidation of its critics from its earliest days. Those who argue that these efforts are merely responses by Iran for wrongs done to it — the Trump administration’s 2020 assassination of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani of the Revolutionary Guards, for instance — have cause and effect backward. Suleimani was targeted after a career spent killing others, including, according to the Pentagon, hundreds of Americans.

How does all this bear on the negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program? The conventional wisdom is that it doesn’t — that Iran’s record of fanaticism and murder have nothing to do with its willingness to limit its atomic ambitions in exchange for economic incentives.

But this evades two key points. First, what signal does it send to Tehran that we will do nothing to punish it, and will continue to negotiate with it, even as it seeks to murder Americans on our own soil, including former senior officials? The answer is: weakness. That’s a perception the Biden administration can ill afford, and an incentive to further Iranian provocations.

Second, what do Iran’s murderous tentacles reveal about the character of the regime? The answer is: It doesn’t stop at red lights. Advocates of a deal can tell themselves that it will have safeguards to verify compliance. But Iran has found ways to cheat, and the lifting of sanctions will provide it with a financial bonanza that it will immediately put to destructive use. Making a deal with Iran now is about as wise as striking a new arms-control agreement with Vladimir Putin.

Since the attempt on Rushdie’s life, writers, activists and celebrities have sought to raise the banner for free speech. That’s good as far as it goes. But it will never go far enough until the free world again finds the nerve to stand up to the odious regime that brought the outrage about.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/23/opinion/iran-rushdie-attack.html

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Despite Nuclear Talks, Iran Is Still Far from Moderation

by
written by

Newsweek     |     TED POE, FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE     |     11/30/21

Negotiations to revive the 2015 Iran nuclear deal resumed in Vienna on Monday despite an uptick in the Islamic Republic’s malign activities. Earlier this month, Iranian forces seized an oil tanker in the Gulf of Oman and conducted comprehensive military exercises, showcasing various military assets including suicide drones like that used in the attempted assassination of Iraqi prime minister Mustafa al-Khadimi.

Mohammad Eslami, the new head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, recently boasted that the country had acquired even larger stockpiles of highly enriched uranium than the International Atomic Energy Agency had estimated in its most recent quarterly report. Iranian president Ebrahim Raisi surely appointed Eslami to the post on the understanding that he would antagonize Western adversaries and undermine the nuclear deal. He is only one of many appointees who embody the ultra-hardline stance of Iran’s new presidential administration.

Raisi’s own reputation and conduct make it extremely difficult to take seriously the announced return to nuclear talks. While some American policymakers are eager to take the proceedings in Vienna as a sign of the new administration’s cooperative tendencies, most know better. They have seen this before, and they know what the outcome will be.

Over 14 years in the U.S. Congress, I saw countless instances of Iranian officials receiving praise for their moderation only to later follow their hardline predecessors in threatening Western interests, undermining global security and violently repressing their own people. Most of my former colleagues have long since abandoned the notion that Iran’s behavior will change through the efforts of its own officials, and realized that such change is much more likely to come from pro-democracy activist groups within Iranian society.

At a Washington conference on Iran last month, former vice president Mike Pence identified some possible sources of change. He described Raisi’s appointment to the presidency as having been “intended to quash internal dissent and intimidate the people of Iran into remaining silent.” But he also noted that the choice of such an openly hardline leader is “a sign of the regime’s growing desperation and vulnerability” and its need to accelerate crackdowns on dissent.

As VP Pence stated, “one of the biggest lies the ruling regime has sold the world is that there is no alternative to the status quo. But there is an alternative—a well-organized, fully prepared, perfectly qualified and popularly supported alternative called the MEK.” Pence described the leader of this opposition movement, Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, as “an extraordinary woman” and “an inspiration to the world.” Pence is right. I dealt with this movement firsthand during my years in Congress, and I have personally met Mrs. Rajavi. It is time for America to invest in true partners in Iran, instead of pleading with the regime’s unpopular figureheads.

Iran’s President Ebrahim Raisi speaks before parliament to defend his cabinet selection in the capital Tehran on August 21, 2021. – Iran’s parliament started reviewing ultraconservative President’s cabinet list in preparation for a vote of confidence expected next week, the assembly’s official media reported.

In January 2018, the Islamic Republic was rocked by a nationwide uprising that encompassed well over 100 cities and towns. Nearly 200 localities took part in another uprising in November 2019, and both movements featured slogans that condemned regime-approved “reformist” and “principlist” politicians as two sides of the same coin. Although the COVID-19 pandemic has since helped to keep a lid on large-scale unrest, Maryam Rajavi, who also addressed last month’s conference, has predicted that the era of the Raisi administration will be defined by an unprecedented increase in “hostility and enmity” between the Iranian regime and its people.

That “hostility and enmity” was on full display in the very election that brought Raisi to power in June 2021, as well as in the previous year’s parliamentary elections. The Iranian people conducted widespread electoral boycotts to show their dissatisfaction with Tehran’s hand-picked politicians.

By some accounts, less than 10 percent of Iran’s eligible voters actually cast votes for Raisi. Most avoided the sham process altogether while some deliberately submitted invalid ballots. The boycott reflected the same desire for change that had defined prior uprisings, but was further motivated by recognition of the leading candidate’s record of violating human rights and suppressing dissent. Raisi had a role in the massacre of 30,000 political prisoners in 1988 and in a crackdown on the 2019 uprising that killed at least 1,500 peaceful protesters.

As domestic conflict emerges in Iran, the international community will have to be prepared to take sides. Much of the world will look to the United States to demonstrate leadership in this regard. The U.S. should waste no time to show support for the Iranian people as they work to consolidate the legacy of the 2018 and 2019 uprisings, as well as the recent electoral boycotts.

Raisi’s past actions are clearly grounds for further sanctions on the Islamic Republic in general, and on the president in particular. They may also be grounds for prosecution at the International Criminal Court, in the event that the United Nations finally conducts a suitable investigation into 1988. The U.S. is in a strong position to take the lead on both issues.

The Western participants in the Iran nuclear deal recently met in Washington and reported having newfound confidence in their unity over Iran policy. Sadly, that unity will be wasted if it is solely directed toward negotiating with the Raisi administration in a futile attempt to foster moderate impulses within the current regime. Assertive policies from without, and pro-democracy pressure from within, are the only hope for wringing change from the Iranian government. Our goal should be to inspire the Iranian people to change that government, once and for all, from dictatorship to democracy.

Judge Ted Poe represented the Second district of Texas in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2005 to 2019 and is the former chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade in the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

https://www.newsweek.com/despite-nuclear-talks-iran-still-far-moderation-opinion-1653938

 

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Butcher of Tehran
Blog

The ‘Butcher of Tehran’ is Terrified of Stepping Foot in the West

by
written by

Newsweek   |   Struan Stevenson   |   10/1/21

Iran’s President Ebrahim Raisi, dubbed the “butcher of Tehran” due to his involvement in murder, genocide and human rights violations, ducked out of attending the U.N. General Assembly in New York and instead sent a pre-recorded message. Raisi is on the U.S. sanctions list because of his leading role in the 1988 massacre of over 30,000 political prisoners in Iran. It seems likely he chose to stay in Tehran rather than risk causing outrage to tens of thousands of ex-pat Iranians, had he come in person to New York. His predecessors as presidents of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hassan Rouhani, both attended the New York U.N. General Assembly meetings in person, but Raisi is clearly afraid of his murderous past catching up with him if he dares to set foot in the West.

Raisi has publicly admitted and even boasted about his involvement in the 1988 massacre, involving mostly members and supporters of the People’s Mojahedin of Iran / Mojahedin e-Khalq (PMOI/MEK), the main democratic opposition to the despotic mullahs. In fact, in 2009, following a nationwide uprising in protest at the rigged election of Ahmadinejad as president, Raisi said: “As long as the MEK leadership is alive, anyone who supports the group in any way deserves to be executed.” By this, he meant that extermination of the MEK members and supporters is a must without any legal basis, simply because they think differently from the mullahs and because their different approach is more appealing to ordinary Iranians, particularly young people, women and intellectuals. There can be no clearer indication of his involvement in the international crime of genocide.

Now, Agnès Callamard, the secretary general of Amnesty International, has called for Raisi to be investigated for crimes against humanity and for his involvement in murder, enforced disappearance and torture. The U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres has also issued a damning report on the grave human rights violations that have occurred in Iran. His report expressed concern at the inhumane treatment and torture of supporters of opposition groups and their arbitrary conviction by revolutionary courts for the alleged crime of moharebeh or waging war against God, which carries the automatic death penalty. The opposition groups referred to by Guterres are mainly the PMOI/MEK, again showing that the U.N. has recognized the crime of genocide. In his report, António Guterres also expresses his concern over impunity from past violations such as the 1988 massacre of political prisoners, accusing the Iranian regime of “destroying evidence of the execution of political dissidents and harassment and criminal prosecution of families of victims calling for truth and accountability.”

In his pre-recorded video speech, filled with lies, cynical abuse, insults, praise of terrorism and threats to global peace and security, Raisi accused the U.S. of using sanctions as an act of war against Iran. He falsely claimed that U.S. sanctions had prevented medicines and COVID-19 vaccines from reaching the Iranian people, despite the fact that sanctions have never affected food, medicines, agricultural items and humanitarian products. It is only the criminal incompetence of the mullahs who ruled against utilizing any COVID-19 vaccines from the West and then defaulted on payments for Sinopharm and Sputnik vaccines from China and Russia, that has led to the appalling tragedy of over 440,000 deaths from the virus in Iran.

Claiming to be keen to send a message of “rationality, justice and freedom” to the world, Raisi, the hanging prosecutor, whose hands are dripping with the blood of his murdered victims, carefully avoided any mention of the mullahs’ massive financial and military support for proxy wars across the Middle East. As the key sponsors of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, the Houthi rebels in Yemen, the brutal Shiite militias in Iraq, the terrorist Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, the mullahs do nothing for rationality, justice and freedom. Raisi even heaped praise on the terrorist godfather Qasem Soleimani, killed by a U.S. drone strike.

Raisi predictably also called for all the signatories to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear agreement, to uphold their obligations under the terms of the deal. He omitted to remind the U.N. how his regime has repeatedly boasted of their serial breach of the agreement as they accelerate their enrichment of uranium to weapons-grade status. Raisi demanded the lifting of U.S. sanctions as the only way of ensuring the Iranian regime’s return to the terms of the JCPOA, despite widespread intelligence that the mullahs’ adherence to the nuclear agreement was always a fraud and their race to develop a nuclear bomb never faltered.

Raisi, as a genocidal murderer, presides over a government of assassins, terrorists and thieves. He must never be allowed to set foot in the West and he should be prevented from addressing international conferences, even remotely. The U.N. Security Council must now facilitate the prosecution of Ebrahim Raisi and other officials responsible for decades of atrocities and human rights violations, particularly the genocidal massacre of political prisoners in 1988. There must be no impunity for mass murderers like Raisi. The recent news that the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague has launched a full probe into Rodrigo Duterte, president of the Philippines, for his involvement in crimes against humanity and murder will send shockwaves to Tehran. Duterte’s extra-judicial killings in his so-called war on drugs may now lead to his indictment, arrest and appearance in the ICC. Surely this must pave the way for a similar indictment against Raisi.
Today, we should send the clearest possible message to Ebrahim Raisi. His crimes will not be forgotten or forgiven. His victims and their families demand justice. He will be held to account for crimes against humanity, murder, human rights violation and genocide. There is a prison cell in The Hague waiting for him.

https://www.newsweek.com/butcher-tehran-terrified-stepping-foot-west-opinion-1633978

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Future of nuclear talks with Iran remains uncertain

by
written by

Future of nuclear talks with Iran remains uncertain as Tehran expands enrichment

Washington Post     |     By Karen DeYoung & Kareem Fahim      |     September 21, 2021

Three months after the last meeting to negotiate a revival of the nuclear deal between Iran and world powers, it remains unclear if and when the talks in Vienna will restart, or who might represent its new government.

In the interim, Iran has continued to expand the quantity and quality of its uranium enrichment, leading some experts to conclude it is now even closer to possessing enough fissile material to build a  bomb than the two or three months the Biden administration has publicly estimated. At the same time, Iran has repeatedly sparred with the International Atomic Energy Agency over monitoring of its nuclear activities agreed in the 2015 deal.

For its part, the administration has continued to warn that negotiating time is running out, without saying how much is left or what it will do if it does. “We don’t have a timetable,” a senior State Department official said.

“Our position is that we’re ready to go back” to the table although “at some point, that won’t be possible any more, because their nuclear advances will become irreversible, and it simply will not be feasible to go back the deal” as it was initially negotiated. “We’ll know it when we see it,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity about the sensitive negotiations. “When we reach that point, we’ll have to assess where we are and how we proceed.”

What to know about Iran’s new president Ebrahim Raisi

Some answers may emerge this week, when the Tehran government says Iran’s new foreign minister, Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, plans to hold bilateral meetings with his counterparts from Britain, Germany and France at the annual United Nations General Assembly. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh told reporters in New York on Tuesday that all were being told the Vienna talks would resume “in the next few weeks.”

In a prerecorded speech to the General Assembly later Tuesday, President Ebrahim Raisi declared ran “considers useful the talks whose ultimate outcome is the lifting of all oppressive sanctions,” but gave no indication of when the Vienna negotiations should restart.

Raisi devoted much of his relatively brief address to criticizing the United States and its sanctions policy, which he called a “new way of war with the rest of the world.” He repeated Iran’s insistence that nuclear weapons “have no place in our defense doctrine,” and are “forbidden” based on a religious decree by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Iranian supreme leader.

Speaking on Afghanistan, Raisi joined much of the world in calling on the Taliban to include others in their government. “If an inclusive government having an effective participation of all ethnicities shouldn’t emerge to run Afghanistan,” he said, “security will not be restored to the country. And like occupation, paternalism is also doomed to failure.”

The State Department has said that Secretary of State Antony Blinken has no plans to meet with Amir-Abdollahian at the United Nations. Iran has no diplomatic relations with the United States, and has refused to speak with it directly at the Vienna talks, using the British, French and Germans as intermediaries. All four are original signers of the nuclear accord, along with China and Russia.

Robert Malley, the administration’s special envoy to the talks and lead U.S. negotiator, visited Moscow and Paris early this month to confirm that all of the signers remain on the same page in wanting to restart the deal under its original terms. “If they either don’t come back to the table any time soon, or they come back and adopt positions inconsistent” with those terms, “then the conclusion will impose itself … they want to continue with their nuclear program,” the State Department official said.

President Donald Trump withdrew in 2018 from the agreement, under which Iran agreed to limit its nuclear activities and submit to international monitoring in exchange for a lifting of U.S. and international economic sanctions. A year after Trump reimposed punitive sanctions, Iran restarted its high-level enrichment program. Tehran has said its activities are for research, and that it has no intention of building a nuclear weapon.

President Biden campaigned on a promise to negotiate a reentry into the deal, but talks that began in April were suspended by Iran in June, after the election of Raisi, a hardline cleric. His government has said it will continue pursuing the restoration of the agreement, but has displayed little of the urgency that the previous reformist government attached to the effort.

In one sign that Iran may be in no hurry, the government has begun replacing the negotiators that headed its team in Vienna. Longtime Iranian negotiator Abbas Araghchi has been replaced as deputy foreign minister by Ali Bagheri, a relative of Khamenei by marriage.

But it is not clear even if the new government plans to leave negotiations in the hands of the foreign ministry, or transfer it to the National Security Council, more fully under Khamenei’s control.

U.S. and European officials are concerned that Iran may backtrack on what was achieved during the first six rounds of talks. Negotiators believed they had reached tentative agreements on a list of sanctions that would be lifted and a possible sequence of actions each side would take for compliance.

“If it’s a different lead negotiator, and we still can’t talk directly to Iran, and they come with parameters that are fundamentally different from what we negotiated, it’s going to be difficult,” the State Department official said. “We hadn’t closed gaps even with the negotiators we were familiar with. If you change … those variables, it’s hard to see if this will happen quickly.”

Raisi has said little about the negotiations, other than confirming Iran wants to return to the table, while insisting that it will not succumb to Western “pressure” and wants sanctions lifted.

Even as it plays apparent hardball over resumption of the talks, Iran has tried to expand its economic and security horizons to the East and within its own region. It has continued to fortify traditional allies, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, to which it recently sent shipments of diesel fuel, while also trying to bolster or repair ties with neighboring Arab countries and other Asian nations.

The strategy was a direct result of Iran’s disappointment with the nuclear deal and the economic crunch that resulted from the reimposition of sanctions. “Using this historical lesson and looking at our neighbors and Asia, we can solve economic problems and other problems,” Abbas Moghtadaei Khorasghani, deputy chairman of the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission in Iran’s parliament, wrote last week in the Hamshahri newspaper.

A linchpin of Iran’s new outlook, he said, was the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a powerful bloc of Eurasian countries, led by China and Russia, that work together on economic, cultural and security matters.

After years of trying, Iran was invited to be a full member of the group last week. “Hegemony and unilateralism are declining,” Raisi said in a speech to the bloc’s members at a summit Friday in Tajikistan. Sanctions and “economic terrorism,” he said, were a collective threat to all of them.

Iran’s strategy to blunt the impact of American sanctions has also included stepping up outreach to Arab countries, such as Saudi Arabia, that are allied with the United States, following years of abysmal relations that have destabilized the region.

“Iran is keen to have large-scale political and economic cooperation and convergence with the rest of the world,” Raisi told the United Nations on Tuesday. It wants “effective interaction with all of the countries of the world, especially with our neighbors, and shake their hands warmly.”

“A new era has begun,” he said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/us-iran-nuclear-negotiations/2021/09/20/7e9fad86-1a37-11ec-bcb8-0cb135811007_story.html

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Iran’s Answer to Biden’s Diplomacy

by
written by

More attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq and a kidnap plan in New York.

WSJ     |     The Editorial Board     |     July 18, 2021

Nuclear talks between the U.S. and Iran adjourned last month and could resume after Iranian President-elect Ebrahim Raisi takes office in August. But Iran’s behavior during the interregnum shows what it thinks about President Biden’s arms-control overtures.

Federal prosecutors said last week that an Iranian intelligence network planned to kidnap a U.S. citizen in New York and bring her to Iran. A dual U.S.-Iranian national, Masih Alinejad has reported extensively on human-rights abuses by the Islamic Republic. The journalist has built a large following on social networks while pushing for a tougher American approach to Tehran.

The prosecutors, who indicted four Iranian nationals, said Iranian intelligence has targeted others in Canada, the United Kingdom and elsewhere. Last year Tehran executed Ruhollah Zam, a France-based Iranian exile abducted while traveling in Iraq. Europe has previously imposed sanctions on Iran for planning terrorist attacks and murders on the Continent.

Meanwhile, Reuters reports that an Iranian commander has encouraged Iran-backed militias to step up attacks on U.S. targets in Iraq and Syria. Shiite militias have attacked U.S. positions in Iraq at least 26 times since President Biden took office, estimates Behnam Ben Taleblu of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Mr. Biden ordered retaliatory airstrikes on the armed groups twice this year. But two American service members were wounded this month during a rocket barrage after the last pinprick U.S. retaliation.

Iran’s violations of the 2015 nuclear deal also continue. Lame duck President Hassan Rouhani says the country can enrich uranium to weapons-grade purity, or about 90%. So far it has stopped at 60%, but that’s well above the 3.67% allowed under the deal. The government is stockpiling other illicit material and ignoring its inspection obligations to the International Atomic Energy Agency. Even Russian diplomat Mikhail Ulyanov admitted, “Iran seems to be going too far.”

from conducting six rounds of indirect talks with the Iranians, who have demanded sanctions relief in exchange for nuclear compliance. According to Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, Washington is willing to lift sanctions on the Supreme Leader; remove restrictions on all but one Iranian bank; and rescind the foreign terrorist designation for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. He says the U.S. has also agreed to undo several executive orders and drop other sanctions.

Mr. Zarif could be lying, but his claims fit the pattern of Obama-Biden negotiations. The U.S. offers a concession in a spirit of goodwill, but Iran demands more. The U.S. makes another concession, and Iran demands more. That’s how John Kerry ended up with a nuclear deal that was time-limited, included a weak inspection regime of suspect sites in Iran, and neglected Iran’s ballistic missile program and regional imperialism.

Mr. Raisi has ruled out further talks on those issues until after both countries have returned to the nuclear deal. Add that to Iran’s continuing bad behavior on multiple fronts, and Mr. Biden has ample cause to walk away from the nuclear talks and keep the sanctions pressure on.

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/irans-answer-to-bidens-diplomacy-11626649752

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

The Rise of Raisi

by
written by

 

Iran has rigged its election to favour Ebrahim Raisi, a hardliner

Voters may favour staying home

The Economist    |    June 12, 2021

 

It is probably a bad sign when one of the few memorable moments in a presidential debate is an admission that the ballot is rigged. The candidates in Iran’s spent much of the televised event, held on June 8th, criticizing an incumbent who is not even on the ballot. Perhaps they felt there was little to discuss: most are hand-picked conservatives put there to lose. It fell to Mohsen Mehralizadeh, a former provincial governor of little note, to point out the obvious. The regime, he said, had aligned “sun, moon and the heavens to make one particular person the president”.

There are no free elections in Iran, where clerics wield ultimate authority and candidates may be disqualified for the flimsiest of reasons. Even by these standards, though, the presidential election scheduled for June 18th is shaping up as a farce. Nearly 600 candidates applied to replace Hassan Rouhani, who took office in 2013 and is barred by term limits from running again. The Guardian Council, a group of clerics and lawyers who vet candidates, allowed only seven on the ballot.

The cull removed any serious challengers who favour better economic and political ties with the West. Among them was Ali Larijani, a former speaker of parliament whose brother sits on the Guardian Council. Eshaq Jahangiri, the current vice-president, did not make the cut, nor did Mostafa Tajzadeh, a former deputy interior minister who spent six years in prison for fomenting anti-regime protests. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the only layman to have served as president, was also disqualified, for the second time.

This is not meant to be an election, in other words. Rather it is meant as a coronation of Ebrahim Raisi, the head of the judiciary and a staunch hardliner who helped orchestrate the mass execution of political prisoners in the 1980s. Even he seems a bit embarrassed by the brazenness of the rigging. “We should make a more competitive election scene,” he said last month. Mr. Rouhani was more direct, calling the election “a corpse”.

Apart from Mr. Raisi, the meagre choices include Saeed Jalili, a former secretary of the national security council, and Mohsen Rezaei, a former head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Both are conservatives who made unsuccessful bids for the presidency in 2013. The only non-hardliners are Mr. Mehralizadeh and Abdolnasser Hemmati, who led the central bank until last month. On his watch the rial crashed, losing two-thirds of its value in three years, largely owing to American sanctions reimposed in 2018 when Donald Trump disavowed the nuclear deal between Iran and world powers.

Hardly an alluring cv, that. But some Iranians have settled on Mr. Hemmati as a protest candidate. The others have reacted accordingly. In the first two debates the lower-ranked candidates spent much of their time ganging up on Mr. Hemmati, who complained that they were providing “cover” for Mr. Raisi. The front-runner, a soporific speaker, tried to float above the fray. The Guardian Council has reminded Iranians that it may disqualify candidates up until election day—a warning, perhaps, that Mr. Hemmati could be banished if he seems too popular.

There may be little risk of that. Many Iranians seem inclined simply to stay at home. A survey published earlier this month by a semi-official agency found that 32% would not vote “under any circumstances”. Just 34% said they would definitely vote, down from 43% in mid-May, before the Guardian Council winnowed the candidates (see chart). Calls for a boycott are mounting. There are even signs of discontent inside the IRGC, some of whose officers would like to wrest more power from the clerics. The Guardian Council barred some of the IRGC’s favored candidates, such as Saeed Mohammad, a former guardsman who runs a huge construction conglomerate. Another, Hossein Dehghan, a former defense minister, withdrew.

All of this would suggest a repeat of last year’s parliamentary election, which saw reform-minded candidates disqualified en masse. The turnout then was just 43%, down 19 points from the previous ballot and the lowest in Iran’s history. Though the regime cares little for democracy, it likes to maintain a respectable façade. Low turnout is seen as an embarrassment. Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader, declared voting a religious duty and called failing to participate a “great sin”. In a speech on June 4th he also said that some candidates had been “wronged” by the vetting process and asked the Guardian Council to “restore their honor”. It refused.

The risk of mass protests, like the ones that followed a fishy presidential election in 2009, which Mr. Ahmadinejad won, seems remote. Most Iranians have lost faith in the system, reformists included. Mr. Rouhani’s eight years in office brought economic decline and scant social change. Still, Mr. Khamenei could have overruled the council and added more candidates to drum up enthusiasm. He chose not to.

His reasons may be partly tactical. The looming election of a hardliner has put pressure on American negotiators to conclude an agreement for re-entering the nuclear deal. The parties, sequestered in a Viennese hotel, are said to be making progress on a timetable for America to lift sanctions and for Iran to reimpose curbs on its nuclear program. Mr. Raisi, they fear, would toss a spanner in the works. His advisers would take time to get to grips with the file and might include ideologues like Mr. Jalili, whose negotiating style involves hours-long lectures on theology.

The supreme leader, who is 82, may also be writing his legacy. He has consolidated power in a narrow group of clerics as he prepares the country for his eventual successor. Mr. Raisi is thought to be a leading candidate, as is Mojtaba Khamenei, the supreme leader’s second son. Some Iranians wonder if Mr. Raisi’s selection as president is in fact meant to undermine his chances of getting the top job. Most Iranian presidents, even those genuinely supported by voters, leave office with their popularity in tatters—and Mr. Raisi, the likely winner of a sham election with a low turnout, will not have much popularity to start with.

This article appeared in the Middle East & Africa section of the print edition under the headline “The rise of Raisi”

https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2021/06/10/iran-has-rigged-its-election-to-favour-ebrahim-raisi-a-hardliner

 

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Trafficking In Iran; A Major Concern

by
written by

Iran Focus     |     By SIA RAJABI     |    APRIL 22, 2021

The trafficking of women in Iran is a real problem, with most of the victims smuggled out of the country from the provinces of Hormozgan, Sistan and Baluchestan, and Khuzestan

Lawyer Hossein Komeili said: “In Sistan and Baluchestan, where forced marriages are common, women are given to men in Afghanistan and Pakistan. [It’s a form of] organized trafficking [where] corruption in the bureaucracy [and cooperation between] “smugglers and the police” [make the issue worse].”

Of course, the government hides the relevant statistics, so it’s impossible to know for sure how many victims there are, but the state-run ROKNA News Agency says that the women are moved under the pretext of finding employment, smuggled into countries, and forced to become sex workers because their identification documents are stolen before they even leave Iran.

Despite its opacity, the government is still considered tier 3 by the US State Department for failing to make the minimum effort to combat human trafficking and the US said that the domestic Iran trafficking networks appear to enjoy anonymity.

One Iranian strategist, Hassan Abbasi, publically exposed the trafficking of women to other Middle Eastern countries as far back as 2008, condemning the President, the Information Minister, the Expediency Discernment Council, the Revolutionary Guards, the Bassij, the Judiciary Chief, the commander of the State Security Force, and Tehran’s mayor for failing to address the issue.

But, of course, one of the main reasons for the increased rate of trafficking is poverty because people are desperate to escape the hardships in Iran, tricked with thoughts of a better life. This is worse in more deprived areas.

Komeili said: “The University of Tehran has a law clinic in the Oudlajan area of Tehran. A woman came to the clinic and said, ‘My daughter has been missing for 2 weeks! Her friends said she went abroad.’ We asked, ‘What did you do in these 2 weeks?’ I did nothing. I thought she was going abroad to earn money and send it to us,” the mother replied. Therefore, the principal reason for human trafficking is poverty, and victims fall into traffickers’ traps thinking they are finding jobs. Laws must be changed, and the victim must not be seen as a criminal.”

While sex trafficking is a major part of this criminal industry, we shouldn’t forget about the nasty blood and organ trafficking business, whereby victims (including children) are held for some time abroad before they are killed for their blood and organs.

https://www.iranfocus.com/en/human-rights/46810-trafficking-in-iran-a-major-concern/

 

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Joe Biden’s Secret Weapon for Resetting Iran Policy

by
written by

VOA can play a crucial role in outreach to the Iranian people. But the White House should get serious about fixing its problems.

POLITICO     |     ILAN BERMAN     |     02/17/2021

On Inauguration Day, Michael Pack, the controversial CEO of the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), became the very first personnel casualty of the Joe Biden administration. In the days that followed, Pack-appointed leaders at the USAGM-managed Voice of America (VOA) and other USAGM entities, including Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Asia, were also summarily axed.

Pack’s short tenure at the helm of the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM)—which he headed from his Senate confirmation in June 2020 until Inauguration Day—was rife with controversy over political overreach and skewed priorities. It’s not surprising, then, that critics have hailed Pack’s departure, and the personnel reshuffle that followed, as an overdue course correction that has brought back normalcy to a well-functioning bureaucracy.

But the problems at USAGM go much deeper than a controversial CEO. In fact, some of Pack’s initiatives—such as trying to impose accountability among unruly government entities and to rectify security clearance irregularities among employees and contractors—were aimed at fixing problems that ailed U.S. broadcasting before he ever arrived at USAGM’s headquarters on Independence Avenue. And it’s more crucial now than ever to fix some of these deep-rooted problems, as the Biden administration attempts to reshape U.S. foreign policy.

There is one place in particular where USAGM has a crucial role to play in U.S. foreign policy: Iran. While many aspects of the Biden administration’s approach to foreign affairs remain unclear, it’s already evident that its Iran policy will be a major departure from that of the Trump administration. Whereas the “maximum pressure” of the Trump era saw Iran face growing political and economic isolation, the new Biden White House has made clear that it is planning a broad diplomatic push to reengage with the Islamic Republic.

In its current state, VOA’s Persian service can’t be of much use in that mission. It ranks as one of the most out-of-date, inefficient and scandal-ridden broadcast services administered by USAGM, plagued by everything from poor management to lackluster content. Such deficiencies have hindered successive administrations from fulfilling the agency’s broader mission of bringing reliable information to unfree societies. And they have prevented Washington from effectively communicating with the most important constituency inside Iran: the Iranian people themselves.

That represents a critical shortcoming. Fundamentally, the long game in Iran has always been about the Iranian public square, and not the country’s aging and exceedingly unpopular clerical regime. It is the people of Iran who will help determine the geopolitical trajectory of the country over the long term. The United States has every interest in helping to shape that trajectory in a more pluralistic and free political direction. Doing so requires meaningful engagement with the Iranian people, together with an upgrading of the essential tools—such as VOA Persian—to make that priority possible.

Perhaps the most basic problem relating to U.S. government broadcasting toward Iran is that it represents something of a black box. While it has become commonplace for officials to claim that U.S. programming is influential among Iranian people, there is in fact little empirical data that this is actually the case. Credible, independent third-party assessments of the true reach and appeal of VOA within the Islamic Republic are conspicuously absent from the public sphere. At the same time, extensive interviews with longtime observers of Persian-language media carried out in recent months suggest that U.S. outreach is increasingly marginal and irrelevant to most Iranians, eclipsed by more compelling and dynamic private sector alternatives, such as Manoto, a London-based Persian-language general entertainment channel, and the Saudi-funded Iran International channel.

That amounts to a major blind spot. Credibly gauging the true level of VOA’s popularity among Iranian audiences (via social media metrics, direct telephonic surveys, and assorted other means) is an essential prerequisite to determining the true worth of the current U.S. investment in broadcasting toward Iran. Simply put, American lawmakers need to know exactly how many Iranians are tuning in to VOA’s Persian-language broadcasts in order to gauge whether the service still remains a “good bet” and a prudent use of taxpayer dollars. Simply taking the word of government employees who rely on those same funds for their paychecks just won’t do.

The second problem plaguing VOA Persian relates to content. The service today suffers from what might be called “content confusion,” with programming encompassing a scattered and ineffective mix of news, analysis and culture and entertainment programming such as reruns of CNN’s once-popular Anthony Bourdain: Parts Unknown. By contrast, VOA’s contemporary market competitors have far more clear-cut and well-defined roles. Manoto, for instance, is sought after by Iranian audiences for its cultural

entertainment content, like cooking and music shows, while Iran International is widely watched for breaking news and analysis.

This state of affairs, moreover, has been made worse in recent years by the cancellation of popular VOA political satire and cultural commentary shows like Parasit and Ofogh, which had previously succeeded in effectively bridging these categories. U.S. officials should reassess the VOA “mission” vis-à-vis Iran–what it is, exactly, that they are trying to say to Iranian audiences–and then reformulate programming to better match those objectives.

Third, U.S. programming toward Iran currently lags woefully in its reaction time. VOA Persian has persistently failed to respond to foreign-policy developments in a timely, impactful manner—much to the detriment of its credibility, and that of the United States as a whole. A particularly egregious example took place following the January 2020 killing of notorious IRGC General Qassem Soleimani, a major event with profound implications for Iran’s regional position and U.S.-Iranian strategic competition. According to former broadcasting officials, it took nearly a full day for VOA to cover the event—a lag that allowed the Iranian regime to monopolize and shape the narrative surrounding Soleimani’s death.

Such a state of affairs is simply unacceptable. The United States needs to be able to credibly, rapidly and effectively tell its side of the story relating to breaking developments in relations between the U.S. and Iran. Developing this sort of capability is essential to debunking regime falsehoods and mischaracterizations about America, as well as explaining to Iranian audiences the strategic rationale behind the latest U.S. diplomatic decision or foreign policy action. Reorganizing programming, as well as altering administrative functions, such as expanding hours of operation, will enhance VOA Persian’s ability to rapidly respond to events.

This ability to respond quickly is important for cultural programming, too. Among VOA’s most influential programs of the recent past is the short documentary and discussion show known as Tablet. Run by prominent women’s rights activist Masih Alinejad, Tablet focuses on the struggle for social and gender equality within Iran, and is—by all available metrics—one of the service’s most successful programs, garnering millions of viewers and ongoing engagement on social media. Yet Tablet is currently undervalued and limited to just one 30-minute weekly program which is subsequently rebroadcast at later dates. Such a structure makes it difficult for U.S. coverage to keep pace with the rapidly changing socio-cultural conversation within the Islamic Republic, and gives the appearance of the United States being out of touch with the Iranian public.

The situation surrounding Tablet is a microcosm of the larger problem. Meaningful programs—those that tap into the trends and attitudes that prevail among Iran’s citizenry—do indeed exist. But because they are built around an existing (and rigid) schedule of programming, they tend to be unresponsive to the rapidly changing human terrain within Iran. Ramping up a more aggressive production schedule for Tablet and other meaningful shows, such as the newer Chess, a political discussion roundtable program, would allow VOA to better reflect the latent dynamism of Iranian society.

Finally, and perhaps most profoundly from an audience standpoint, current U.S. outreach to Iran is simply not aesthetically appealing. Low production values and amateurish appearance contribute greatly to VOA’s failure to win “hearts and minds” among Iranians, notwithstanding the service’s inherent credibility as the authoritative “voice” of the United States. This becomes especially glaring when VOA programming is compared to its market competitors in the Persian media space—all of which (even Iranian regime broadcasts) offer more dynamic visuals and content than U.S. efforts currently do. In order to make VOA programs distinguishable from, and superior to, their competitors, the U.S. government needs to invest in significant upgrades to the appearance, professionalism and content of the service. In particular, the service could benefit from the creation of new, original programming geared specifically toward greater engagement of Iranian youth, who represent a significant segment of Iran’s 85-million-person population.

By their nature, instituting the reforms and upgrades outlined above will be a long-term endeavor—one that is likely to stretch across multiple presidential administrations. Even so, there are a number of near-term actions that the Biden administration can take now that would jump-start the process, with immediate results.

The first is to institute personnel changes. Over the years, many VOA Persian employees have come to be regarded in a deeply negative light by Iranian-American activists and regime critics alike, who have chafed at their overt political biases and their failure to properly communicate U.S. policy. In order for it to be taken seriously by outside observers, any reform effort—which can be driven by a new USAGM CEO with input from the White House—will require meaningful changes at both the reporter/editor and senior management levels. Moreover, such personnel changes will need to be publicized and promoted as a way of clearly communicating to outside critics that the U.S. government has heard their complaints about staffing and is serious about responding to them.

Another key priority for the new White House must be to encourage VOA to better leverage its inherent advantage: access. VOA’s close geographic proximity to the U.S. Congress and assorted executive branch agencies in Washington remains woefully underutilized by its Persian service. Little effort is currently made by VOA reporters and management to seek out interviews, commentary and insights from officials and subject matter experts as a means of giving the proper context to U.S. policy.

That is a grave error. As numerous studies have borne out, Iran’s population is young, dynamic and vibrant. It’s also westward-looking, and keenly attuned to America as a symbol of everything that their current, repressive government isn’t. VOA outreach presently doesn’t dwell on the institutions, processes and values that makes the United States so different from Iran’s clerical regime.

It needs to. In order to shed greater light on official U.S. decisions, more sustained engagement with officials by VOA Persian journalists and reporters is essential. Such a focus would also help correct disinformation about the U.S. government promoted by the Iranian regime. It would also give relevant U.S. lawmakers more confidence that American outreach toward Iran is properly capturing their views and is representative of U.S. policy—a state of affairs which, sadly, does not currently exist.

VOA Persian has an important role to play in the current administration’s mission of re-engaging with the Islamic Republic, and Biden would be wise to use it. But first, the service needs to be fixed, top to bottom. Whether or not the president delivers on that goal will be a key test of how serious he is about restarting a real dialogue not just with the Iranian regime, but with the Iranian people as well.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/02/17/joe-bidens-secret-weapon-for-resetting-iran-policy-469122

 

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts