Iran is feeling pretty confident these days. The Americans are leaving Afghanistan and leaving Iraq, while showing just how far they’re not willing to go in Libya. A handful of former enemies in the Sunni Arab world — regimes that for decades acted as a pro-U.S. counterweight to Iran’s regional ambitions — have fallen in the wake of the Middle East’s democratic uprising. Others Gulf states with significant Shiite populations, such as Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, seem a little shaky. Tehran, meanwhile, rockets ahead.
Literally. Last week, the U.K. foreign minister announced that Iran had tested missiles and rockets that can “deliver a nuclear payload.” The recipients of that delivery, by the way, would be Israel and Europe. It was a not-so-subtle message to the ever-feckless international community: We’re going to get a nuclear weapon. Your sanctions have not worked. There’s nothing you can — or will — do about it.
Advertisement
The White House’s response to the tests? Silence.
Sound (or no sound, as it were) familiar? Flashback to 2009: The Green Revolution sweeps the streets of Tehran. Ahmadinejad and his thugs brutally crack down on protesters of Ahmadinejad’s contested electoral victory. The White House decides to keep quiet. The same pattern unfolded following the democratic revolutions of this past season.
It’s not just “leading from behind,” as one of Obama’s advisers memorably described his leadership style, but speaking from the rear. The result? Tehran survived its brush with democracy, further emboldening the regime. Now they see the Arab Spring as another great opportunity. “[Iran] didn’t create the Arab Spring or start it, but they are clearly trying to exploit it wherever they can,” Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has observed.
That’s playing out in a number of ways, all harmful to the U.S. In Egypt, Iranian warships were allowed to pass through the Suez Canal en route to Iran’s close ally Syria for “training.” It was the first time Iranian warships were allowed passage in the Suez since the 1979 Iranian revolution. Military officials attribute the recent spike in violence in Iraq — June was the deadliest month for U.S. soldiers since 2008 — not to al-Qaeda, but Shiite extremists linked to Iran. After Obama’s Afghanistan speech, Ahmadinejad invited president Hamid Karzai over from Kabul for a meeting. Then Karzai broke bread with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Iran’s backing has given Syria a bit of extra swagger in its brazen repression of the (mostly) Sunni protesters taking to the streets there. The Revolutionary Guards are aiding Syrian president Bashar al-Assad’s violent crackdown. It’s been horrific — there’s a viral YouTube video of a 13-year-old boy whose body was returned to his family after weeks of torture at the hands of government forces, including kneecapping, cigarette burns, and castration. The Obama administration whined, but as usual, they won’t have the guts to call for Assad to step down until he’s stepped down. That’s unfortunate, because the fall of Assad would be a serious blow to an Iranian ally.
By going into Libya, the White House took its eye off the biggest looming threat. (On the other hand, Libya did prove that Obama could be convinced to do anything — allegedly in this case by a handful of “Warrior Princesses” — so if I was Ahmadinejad and Khamenei, I wouldn’t feel so confident that a military response would be out of the question.)
Iran policy watchers like to describe Iranian machinations as “three-dimensional chess.” It’s about time the White House puts on its 3-D glasses. We need a new strategy to deal with Iran in the post–Arab Spring world. Here’s what I propose — it’s short of bombing and more effective than economic sanctions. Obama likes to talk about Iran’s hypocrisy, so let’s recover the missed opportunity of a democratic Iran. Let’s start supporting Iranian opposition groups. Let’s work to turn the Arab Spring into a Persian Winter.
—Elise Jordan is a New York‒based writer and commentator. She served as a director for communications in the National Security Council in 2008 and 2009 and was a speechwriter for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
This article sounds almost childish. All the standard unsubstantiated claims about Iran are repeated. Then, at the end, an empty strategy is proposed for backing the Iranian "opposition groups." Who are these opposition groups? The Green Movement is practically dead and its leaders, Mousavi and Karoubi, are eager supporters of the current Islamic form of government. Does Ms. Jordan, perhaps, consider the MKO terrorists as a viable opposition? Then, she probably does not know that the MKO is universally reviled in Iran for its traitorous collaboration with Saddam Hussein and its numerous terrorist acts in Iran.
To consider a few of the initial claims about Iran, Ms. Jordan states the oft-repeated statement that, U.K. foreign minister announced that Iran had tested missiles and rockets that can “deliver a nuclear payload.” This claim has been repeated verbatim in numerous Western publications without any critical analysis. It is worthless and without any solid evidence. It is like saying that Iran cannot build trucks since the trucks could carry nuclear bombs. Also, since when does Iran have to report to the UK or the US its missile tests?
Then, Ms. Jordan decries the passage of two small Iranian navy boats through the Suez Canal. So what? Only in time of war would Egypt consider the blocking of these ships. They were no threat to anyone.
As far as Iran backing Syria in its crackdown on demonstrators are concerned, again, it is all based on empty speculation. Perhaps, Ms. Jordan is not aware that much of this turmoil is instigated from Saudi Arabia and Jordan. In fact, there are reports that $500M has been funneled to a previous Syrian vice president to overthrow Assad.
Instead of repeating cheap accusations based on speculation, perhaps Ms. Jordan will consider presenting results of some original investigations from now on.
Logical123 - "Then, Ms. Jordan decries the passage of two small Iranian navy boats through the Suez Canal."
If an Iranian ship has not passed through the Suez Canal since 1979, doesn't that tell you something?
Since you are such an authority on Iran and the Middle East in general, I'm sure the editors would welcome you to write an article to debunk the hapless Ms.Jordan. After all, she hasn't been Director of Communications in the National Security Council since '09 so probably would enjoy being brought up to date.
To J.D.: Do you really want to know why Iran never tried to send its Navy ships through the Suez Canal in the last 32 years? Is that such a big deal for you? In the first place, Iran never had much of a Navy. Secondly, with Mubarak in power in Egypt there could have been all kinds of complications since Iran and Egypt were essentially antagonists. The new government of Egypt wants to re-establish normal diplomatic relations with Iran. This whole issue of two little ships crossing the Suez Canal is such a non-issue that it is amazing that Ms. Jordan and you are making such a big deal about it. It is not even worth talking about.
As far as Ms. Jordan's past experience as the Director of Communication for the NSC is concerned (only during 2008-09), I assume it is like a press officer who has no decision making authority and simply broadcasts decisions by others. Also, as a speech writer for Condoleezza Rice, who was one of the worst Secretaries of State in recent memory and who lied about a variety of subjects (e.g., WMDs in Iraq), I don't think her experience is particularly relevant.
Finally, because of its extreme right-wing orientation, I don't think The National Review would want to hear my viewpoint on Iran.
Elise Jordan wrote: Here’s what I propose (...) Let’s start supporting Iranian opposition groups.
___________________________________
I assume we've been doing that for decades. But any public support of those groups will give the current thugocracy a HUGE propaganda victory. "See, we told you that The Great Satan was trying to destabilize our Islamic republic."
There is no greater gift we could give to Iran's rulers than to openly support their overthrow.
@logical123....we think thou dost protest too much... you do know that you are repeating verbatum the islamic regime's line about "the great Satan meddling in the affairs of Iran"...what is it about the signs the people of Iran held up in the streets in 2009/10 that was unclear to you? In English & in French? They want us to help them. "Two little ships" passed through the Suez...what "size" ship should worry us? Did you really say: Two "little" ships? As in size matters...
As for your assertion that the only opposition is Mousavi/Kahrubi & MKO...now you really need to educate yourself...there are numerous opposition groups committed to secular democracy in Iran and to bring down this heinous murderous regime. America should help. God knows our mistakes brought in Khomeinei....we owe it to the people of Iran to help them.
So as an apologist for the regime...you are sad...and sexist...that part is not a surprise...but as for your "fake cyber name"...(all regime apologists use fake names).... you maybe 123 but you are not logical...leave Iran alone.
To Nazie Eftekhari: When did I talk about the Great Satan? Also, other than the Green Movement and the MKO, there is no significant "organized" opposition to the Iranian government. Where are they and what have they done?
As far as the 2009 election is concerned, if you can do a Google search, you will find a number of authoritative reports showing that Ahmadinejad had about 60% support in multiple polls both before and after the election. The demonstrations by the intelligentsia in the north of Tehran were not representative of the whole country. Sorry to burst your bubble!
You repeat the childish claim that anyone who is against the American lies about Iran is a secret agent and an apologist for the Iranian government. I do not support the Mullahs at all since, for one thing, I don't believe in any religion. For example, I am vehemently opposed to Sharia laws and laws against apostasy. But, I oppose the idiotic lies that the US, UK and other Europeans are saying about Iran.
Finally, I don't think any of the sanctions against Iran are justified. Iran has no nuclear weapons program and both the IAEA and the US 2011 NIE have confirmed it. If you want now to say that the sanction should be for human rights violations, then the original reasons were invalid. Also, Saudi Arabia is a much worse violator of human rights. So, why don't they put sanction on it?
This article is the most lucid analysis of US Iran policy that I have read recently. By the way the comments of 123 are not worth dignifying with a response. You want to see Iranian opposition- open your eyes. Thirty years of backward, tyrannic, corrupt mullahcrocy has produced a profound grass roots opposition that eminates from the basic premise of man's desire to be free. The day of reckoning for the likes of 123 is near. In the future Norenbergs of Iran the depth of this regimes crimes will be revealed for the world to see. Nazie Eftekhari you are correct in all that you have said. Let us hope that the day of freedom for Iran will get here soon.
To Saied Assef: Do you even know what the subject of this article is? Nobody is defending the Mullahs of Iran or the idiotic power of religion in Iran. What we are talking about here is the lies of the US and its allies about Iran. Just because you don't like the government of Iran does not mean that you can make up ridiculous lies about it. If you want to complain about human rights in Iran then, as I said before, why doesn't the West complain about the situation in Saudi Arabia which is much worse?
The author of this superficial and boring article is not capable of doing journalistic work. So he should abandon his job and stop providing propaganda and calls for hate and mistrust. But USA is living in fear these days, they are fearing everyone, everywhere in the world. Like Israel, USA has only enemies in the world and even its "allies" are laughing at USA and its helpless repeating of the same mistakes again and again.
And the reason for this mess is the ill-adviced policies of conservatives and republicans and tea party clowns. All these have ruined the country and are now blaming all others. They do this, since they are stupid and like donkeys and apes. They don't learn from their mistakes and are immune against reason and insight.
While I agree with Ms. Jordan’s notion of supporting democratic movement in Iran, I find her proposal hollow and with no substance. U.S. has been at odds with the Islamic regime in Iran, which many attribute its rise to U.S. wrongheaded foreign policies of 1970s, for more than 30 years.
A golden opportunity in fostering democracy in Iran was lost with President Bush’s infamous “axis of evil” State of Union in 2002. At that time President Khatami of Iran was reaching out to the west in an effort to move from confrontational policies, aiming to normalize the relations and steer Iran towards a path of open dialogue. At that time the icy relations were slowly thawing. American and Iranian sportsmen were holding friendly matches and visiting each other. Mr. Khatami refused to meet fiery anti-American Iraqi cleric Mogtada Al Sadr but he met with Israel’s President at John Paul II’s funeral. Yet, Mr. Bush’s administration refused to engage with him directly or indirectly which brought every effort to a halt.
Mr. Bush’s get tough policy towards Iran galvanized Iran’s conservative political establishment against reformists like Mr. Khatami and their efforts to reconcile Iran’s differences with the west. This caused the rise of Mr. Ahmadinejad, who was supported by Iran’s conservative political establishment, to power in 2004.
Now, Ms. Jordan is criticizing lack of support by Obama administration for the Green Movement in 2009. Since Mr. Khatami is/was one of the leaders of the Green Movement, the question for Ms. Jordan is why did Mr. Bush not support Khatami’s reform efforts or at least open a dialogue from 2000 until Khatami left office in 2005?
We are just harvesting what Mr. Bush sowed. As a history major, Ms. Jordan should now it better.
