Stand by your words in Cairo or do nothing and support the Theocracy
At the end of the first Gulf War in 1991, President George H.W. Bush was urged by then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Colin Powell, NSA Brent Scowcroft, and Sec. Defense Dick Cheney not to pursue Iraqi forces into Baghdad and topple Saddam Hussein. The reasons were simple: a fear of casualties, lack of a UN Mandate to remove Hussein and worries that the international coalition would fracture if the US undertook this mission.
Instead, Bush ended the war in hopes that Hussein would be overthrown in an internal coup d’état. Relying on CIA intelligence and assets in Iraq, certain military and government official as well as Kurds in the North and Shia’a leaders did revolt, expecting the help of the Americans. When it became clear to Hussein that the west and America would not intervene, the rebels were crushed – brutally and systemically murdered, along with anyone in their family or tribe that Hussein felt was a threat. Hussein solidified his leadership and purged the government and military of all moderates and reformers. The price – an ethnic cleansing of massive proportion and 12 more years of Saddam’s brutal reign.
The hopes of reformers in Iraq were stoked by tacit US support, only to be destroyed.
Fast forward to 2009. The Hussein brutal reign is over in Iraq, replaced at great cost by a fledgling democracy. President Barrack Obama becomes the first African American President of the US running on a message of ‘Hope and Change.’
In June, Mr. Obama delivers an address to the Muslim World from Cairo. In his usual soaring rhetoric, Mr. Obama affirms a ‘commitment…to governments that reflect the will of the people.’ Further, he says:
“government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.”
Whatever happened in the Iranian elections over the weekend, it is clear that the consent of the people was not even counted. While Ahmadinejad may well have won the elections, it is clear that Mir Hossein Mousavi has the support of millions. And the Iranian government, which announced the results of an election where 39 million people cast paper ballots within an hour of the polls closing, had no intent of counting the will of the people.
Now, the country has erupted in protests for democracy and for the challenger, Mousavi. No doubt emboldened by the rhetoric of Mr. Obama, thousands are risking harsh sanctions, arrest, even death for protesting to support an awakening in Iran.
Make no mistake, regardless of who wins, the Mullahs who run the theocracy in Iran have selected the men (no women may hold office in Iran) who are permitted to run. And the elected leaders ultimately answer to the Mullahs. However, at a time when Iran threatens to have a nuclear bomb in the short run, any glimmer of hope would be welcomed.
It is clear that without action by the West – read the United States, this peaceful protest will be brutally crushed by the heavy handed theocratic dictators of Iran. And like the inaction of America to support democracy following the Gulf War, tens of thousands of Iraqis will pay a heavy price. Only Iran has nuclear weapons in the near term, so the stakes for Iranians and the world are much greater.
To quote President Obama himself, ”elections alone do not make true democracy.” What will it be, Mr. President? Words or deeds?
Copyright 2009 Reprint permitted with the following citation:
TJPaine
Un^Common Sense
Dedicated to the Advancement of Americanism
http://uncommonsense-tpaine.blogspot.com/
