About Iran: The Iraq Crisis and the Future of Iran
Questions and
Answers by About Iran…
The prospect of an attack by the United States on Iraq and the installation of a
new regime, or a transitional rule by the United States in Iraq, has raised many
questions and concerns regarding its fall out for Iran. About Iran… addresses
some of these questions and concerns below.
Question: Does the Islamic Republic welcome the toppling of the Iraqi dictator
and its own long term nemesis, Mr. Saddam Hussein?
Answer: No, it does not. While the Iranian people despise the Iraqi dictator,
the conservative rulers of the Islamic Republic are very concerned about the
addition of another US military and possibly civilian presence on Iran’s western
borders. US military is already bordering Iran by the virtue of its military
deployment in Afghanistan and has been facing off with the Islamic Republic in
the Persian Gulf for more than two decades. The addition of Iraq under the
military presence of the United States will increase the besieged state of the
Islamic Republic vis-à-vis the United States. Moreover, the US control of the
Iraqi oil facilities may have a profoundly negative impact on Iran’s oil income
which will further reduce the Islamic Republic’s ability to respond to the
economic woes of Iran. This is especially important as the Iranian regime is
gripped with expanding unrest among an overwhelmingly young population that is
demanding freedom and democracy.
Question: How about the reformists? Do they share the same concerns?
Answer: The reformists most likely share some of the same concerns as the
conservatives. After all, they also support the Islamic regime, albeit they are
arguing for an ambiguous and impractical version of it, which they call the
Democratic Islamic Republic! However, the reformists are more realistic than the
conservatives. They are reacting to the prospect of a war with the United
States in two different ways. On the one hand, they are engaged in a regional
diplomacy to force Iraq to fully comply with the United Nations, thereby
aligning themselves with the idea of respect for international law. On the
other hand, they are preparing themselves with the reality of an attack and of
having a long term US presence in Iraq afterwards. Moreover, they are using the
prospect of the military attack for advancing reformist causes, including
rapprochement with the United States.
Question: What do they do as part of this strategy of preparing for war and
rapprochement with the United States?
Answer: For example, the reformists and some of their conservative allies are
actively hosting US supported Iraqi opposition by providing them with US
financed head quarters in Tehran and logistical support in Iran. Moreover, they
are against any overtures or deals made with the Iraqi regime at this juncture.
They openly discourage and speak against any actual or planned high ranking
meetings between the Islamic Republic statesmen and their Iraqi counterparts.
Lastly, but in an important way, they are pushing for their reform agenda as the
only way to insure the regime’s survival in lieu of a prospective or actual
attack by the United States. Part of this agenda includes opening a dialogue
with the US.
Question: What will the Islamic Republic do during the actual war?
Answer: The Islamic Republic will most likely stay neutral officially, but will
nevertheless assist the United States in an indirect way, i.e., opening supply
routes in the name of supporting opposition Iraqis or the Iraqi people. The
Islamic Republic will more openly support the United States if the war were to
be sanctioned by the United Nations. But, it is inconceivable that the Islamic
Republic will engage in hostilities against the United States and/or Iraq.
Question: As Iran is denoted as a member of the President Bush’s Axis of Evil,
many analysts argue that the Islamic Republic is the next on the list of
terrorist states to be "terminated" by the United States. Should the United
States consider such an attack?
Answer: No, an attack on Iran is unlikely, and if it occurs, it will be a
tragic mistake. The Islamic Republic is a dark regime with an abysmal human
rights record at home and a track record of carrying out terrorism against
Iranian opposition members abroad and other subversive acts of extreme concern
to the world’s civilization. But, none of this justifies an attack on Iran.
Iran is a country in the midst of a peaceful and democratic revolution and the
end result of this process is the emergence of a secular and democratic Iran
that will join its rightful place in the family of nations. Such an Iran should
and will pursue normal diplomatic and friendly relations with all nations,
including the United States.
Question: Let’s probe the hypothetical US attack on Iran further. Should the
US attack Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein, and should Iraqis treat American
troops as their liberators, there are some in the policy making circles that
propose that the US should next liberate Iranians, arguing that Iranians would
welcome such a liberation as well.
Answer: First, let’s hope that a peaceful solution through the United Nations
resolves this crisis. Second, in the event of a war, what may or may not happen
in Iraq is the business of the Iraqi people. Iranians overwhelmingly will
resist and disapprove of a US attack on Iran, even if it means ridding them of
the totalitarian Islamic Republic regime. It is important to note that
historically Iranians are friendly people; they are considered among the most
hospitable people of the world. At the same time, Iranians, throughout their
history, have been invaded by foreign forces, such as the Arabs, Mongols and
Turks, and have always been resentful of it. Iranians, like any other sovereign
nation, are proud people, who consider themselves capable of resolving their own
domestic problems without foreign influence. Iran’s experience of undue foreign
intervention in Iranian affairs, primarily by Britain and Russia in the last two
centuries, and more recently by the British and Americans, which was epitomized
in the coup of August 19, 1953, against the democratic government of Dr.
Mossadegh by the CIA and the British Secret Service, has made Iranians wary and
distrustful of any government installed by a foreign influence.
Question: Thus, how might democratic governments, including the United States,
support Iranians in their struggle for freedom, democracy and human rights?
Answer: Any moral foreign support of Iranians’ struggle for freedom, democracy
and human rights, short of military intervention and/or sponsoring an individual
or faction and/or installing a puppet regime in Iran, is most welcome. Iranians
need the moral support of the freedom loving people of the world. The United
States should be prudent in throwing its moral and political weight behind a
person or a party that does not truly represent the Iranian people. Let the
call from the Iranian people come in terms of which party they truly support in
representing their democratic aspirations. Iranians, on their own, will fight
the Islamic Republic, as they are not just fighting against a tyrannical regime,
but also against the concept of being treated as "immature little people" who
need a "Vali-Faghih" (an omnipotent master) in conducting their social and
political affairs. Any foreign intervention will only negate this historical
struggle which - in a general term - began with the Constitutional Revolution of
1906. The 1906 revolution was against the absolute and despotic rule of the
monarch, who also treated people as his powerless and voiceless subjects.
Question: What is this negation about more exactly?
Answer: The central pillar of the Islamic Republic theocracy rests upon the rule
of "Velayat-Faghih." This pillar emanates from the Shiite idea of Uma (a
collective body of believers in a Shiite society - resembling the idea of
fascism in Italy under Mussolini and Nazism in Germany under Hitler) which
requires a supreme religious leader or "Vali-Faghih." This pillar assumes that
the Iranian people, as an Uma, are unintelligent and incapable of independent
conduct of their social and political affairs, and thus need a Vali-Faghih to
guide them. Since the revolution, Iranians have struggled incessantly against
this totalitarian concept and will soon succeed in doing away with it and
replacing it with the democratic principle of the government of the people by
the people in a secular constitutional framework. Any foreign intervention,
either directly or indirectly by installing a puppet regime, will mean that
Iranians are not capable and intelligent enough to conduct their own struggle
for forming a future government in Iran. Such an intervention negates the
present struggle of the Iranian people against the Velayat-Faghih and the
totalitarian regime of the Islamic Republic.
(Please Distribute Copies of This Text)
To unsubscribe, please send a "Remove" E-mail.
For more Information or to subscribe to Persian publications of About Iran…,
please contact:
About Iran…
PO Box 768
Morton Grove, IL 60053, USA
Telephone: (847) 729-5925
Fax: (847) 729-5926
E-Mail: AboutIran@Aol.Com