by Heshmat Alavi
Following the recertification of Iran’s
compliance with a nuclear deal aimed at curbing its controversial nuclear
program, there is quite a stir over the Trump administration possibly adopting
a regime change policy in the face of Tehran’s belligerence.
There are those who favor such a trajectory, while Iran lobbyists
and apologists have promptly argued otherwise, saying war should not be an option and citing ongoing
campaigns in countries across the region to back their opinions.
Secretary
of State Rex Tillerson’s strong position of supporting regime change in a
hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee sent shockwaves in Tehran and
beyond.
“Our
policy towards Iran is to push back on (its regional) hegemony, contain their
ability to develop, obviously, nuclear weapons and to work towards support of
those elements inside of Iran that would lead to a peaceful transition of that
government,” he said.
Secretary
of Defense James Mattis, known for his “Iran, Iran, Iran” description of the
source of Middle East dilemmas, followed suit.
“Until
the Iranian people can get rid of this theocracy, these guys who think they can
tell the people even which candidates they get a choice of. It’s going to be
very, very difficult,” Mattis said in a special interview.
It
is broadly assumed that the diplomatic pressure and sanctions initiative
embarked upon by the White House and Congress are aimed at serving a regime
change objective in Iran. The next necessary step would be to make this policy
crystal clear to Tehran and all relevant parties.
Such strong statements made by Tillerson and Mattis dig deep into
the Iran dossier and realize one stark, and very positive, difference between
Iran and its neighbors. In contrast to others, the Iran regime change
enterprise enjoys a long-term plan presented by a grass-rooted opposition
movement, symbolized in the Iranian opposition, the National Council of
Resistance of Iran (NCRI).
Unfortunately,
the campaigns launched in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and even Syria, after former
US president Barack Obama said the dictator Bashar Assad must go, all lacked
this very necessary element, and the world remains witness in horror of the
drastic consequences. Millions left killed and injured, scores more displaced,
trillions of dollars literally wasted and entire cities and countries leveled.
And the only benefactor has been the mullahs’ regime…, being an entirely
different topic of discussion.
Tehran
lobbyists stationed in Washington are heard saying Iran also lacks any such
organized opposition capable of delivering anything different from what we have
witnessed in other countries. For years they have been inaccurately
mischaracterizing the NCRI as lacking adequate organization, support and
resources.
To
spare time, one needs only refer to this coalition’s recent July 1stconvention in Paris, held annually, for a glimpse of its social
base and international backing. Over 100,000 members of the Iranian Diaspora,
joined by hundreds of international dignitaries from all walks of life
representing a conglomerate of political trends, shows how the NCRI, and its
President Maryam Rajavi, have
garnered growing support both inside Iran and abroad to bring about regime
change and establish freedom and democracy in their homeland.
Advocates of the appeasement approach vis-à-vis Iran will further
continue quarreling over how the West must continue its effort of seeking
internal Iranian elements of moderation.
Ever
since the 1980s a slate of senior Iranian regime officials, including former
prime minister Mir Hossein Mousavi, former presidents Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and
Mohammad Khatami, and now Hassan Rouhanihave been
naively dubbed as “moderates” or “reformists.”
What
deserves comprehension after 35 years of deception is the fact that Iran’s
“moderate/reformist” pretext has long surpassed its expiration date. While the
Iranian people are yearning for change, there is no such appetite, capacity or
potential in Tehran’s ruling mullahs’ apparatus.
·
Mousavi supported the regime’s
unnecessary continuation of the war against Iraq, devastating the lives of
millions,
·
Rafsanjani supervised a
domestic cleansing of dissident voices, and a string of assassinations and
terrorist plots abroad,
·
Khatami presided over the 1999
student uprising crackdown and advanced Tehran’s clandestine nuclear weapons
drive,
·
and Rouhani’s first term as
president rendered the execution of over 3,000 individuals, and the trend
continues as we speak with over 100 executions in July alone. Rouhani has also
blessed a dangerous spike in ballistic missile advancements by Iran’s
Revolutionary Guards (IRGC).
As
a result, any form of moderation or reform is nothing but a hoax misused by
Tehran to continue misleading and deceiving the international community, while
threatening the rise of hardliners if the likes of Rouhani are deserted.
Comments
Post a Comment