Part 2: The False Western Dichotomy on Regime Change in the Middle East
As I mentioned in my last blog post, I discussed how the United States’ foreign policy has been over aggressive for decades, with little to show for it. I also discussed how Obama vowed to change some of this.
Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize because of his dedication to discussing new ideas and opening doors. He’s made overtures to reduce arsenals of nuclear weapons, even resulting in the reverse motion of the doomsday clock. Obama has opened negotiations with Iran, revived peace talks between Palestinians and Israel, and has spoken publicly about the need to engage the Muslim world, most notably during his trip to Egypt. Obama has discovered that you cannot create peace without creating understanding.
But that only goes so far. Obama’s open hand to Iran is getting pretty chewed up, which means that he will soon have to face the false dichotomy again: invade Iran or ignore the Islamic Republic’s fierce threat. However, Obama has many more options available to him.
Sanctions in Iran, in Cuba, and even sanctions against Iraq before the 2003 invasion, have not created the results that the United States would like. The first problem is that sanctions often hurt the poor more than the regime. The second problem is that not all nations cooperate with sanctions, making them difficult to enforce. The third problem is that those in power have a tenacious ability to get what they want, regardless of sanctions.
To take those issues backwards, in Iran, powerful elites already leech resources out of their own people by running smuggling operations on goods and services that they themselves ban, like satellite dishes and alcohol. Also, Iran is arguably the largest smuggler in the world, often selling illegally obtained weapons to Hamas and Hezbollah. Clearly, unilateral and total sanctions against Iran won’t work. Obama knows this, which is why he has developed a plan for specific sanctions that would target Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Iranian Republican Guard. The U.S. has clear intelligence about what goods and services those organizations are consuming, and so Obama believes that such sanctions will cripple the military arm of the regime, adding to its woes. This plan is also more agreeable to Russia and China, which have stonewalled further sanctions against Iran so far. This also means that the United States may be in a position to lift sanctions that they deem ineffective, an option which some within the State Department have hinted may be in development now.
With the approach to add pressure to the government, rather than the people of Iran, is the idea of adding stress to the Iranian national banks. Last week, Iran announced that it will be limiting the amount of cash that can be withdrawn at any point. The government claimed that this was done to prevent money laundering, however intelligence annd financial experts have argued that the regime itself is guilty of most of the money laundering in the region. Rather, this seems like a way for the government to prop up its failing banking system. Due to the post-election instability, and in some cases due to an Ariana-Huffington-esque protest, the banking system in Iran is on the verge of collapse. Obama has been tight-lipped about this option, but any sanctions that further damage the fragile financial sector in Iran could bring the regime to its knees.
However, as the Obama administration is learning in China, the ultimate weapon the West has against the Iranian Regime is the Iranian people themselves. The regime is weak (though not as weak as the anti-regime websites would like the world to believe) and extremely unpopular (conservative estimates say that less than 30% of the people of Iran support the government there). Hilarry Clinton recently discussed how vital uncensored internet access is to China’s development in the 21st century. Senator Richard Lugar, writing for Foreign Policy, even argued that Twitter and other social media sites are integral weapons in the battle against dictatorships and repressive regimes.
However, the government has been able to clamp down on internet access and text messaging within the country. Using a combination of heavy filtering (blocking websites like Facebook, Youtube, and Twitter) and randon white filtering (blocking EVERYTHING except certain allowed websites), effective internet access is rare in Iran. The government has also successfully tracked dissedents who do get through government censors, arresting activists and prosecuting those who speak out against the government.
Initially, Austin Heap (creator of the Haystack Project) designed software that ran off of USB thumb drives and would bypass Iranian government censors. Haystack is used by many prominent Green Movement bloggers, and has saved lives. Recently, many experts on cyber-security have warned that the government may be utilizing new technologies and methods that may even defeat Haystack. While the Iranian regime may have been unprepared for the social media revolution, the government is playing catch-up, and lives are at stake.
Which brings me to Obama’s final option in dealing with Iran. The U.S. government should make free, uncensored, high-speed internet a mandatory right for all citizens of the world. They should be using their technological prowess to defeat the hackers, censors, and repressive regimes that persecute their own people for expressing their thoughts. The U.S. should be encouraging, wherever possible, the freedom of speech and the transference of ideas (think “Internet Free World” instead of “Radio Free Europe”) because, as Thomas Jefferson put it, no idea is too dangerous to be discussed. The United States has the ability to give the Iranian people a voice, the tools to pick up where Haystack left off, and even go beyond. Now is the time to start to use this capability.
Is this meddling? Perhaps, but it isn’t picking a side, or backing a regime, or installing a pro-Western government. The Islamic Republic of Iran is a direct result of our meddling in the 1970s. As a reaction to U.S. policies, the people of Iran have become slaves to a repressive theocracy. In an ironic way, by giving voice to the Iranian people, the U.S. would be allowing Iran to finally overcome the consequences of Western influence and interference.
The world isn’t flat yet, but it’s getting there. Freedom, democracy, and peace are ideas whose time has come. The freedom of information will show the world the truth…and the truth shall set you free.
Posted in Featured, Foreign Policy, Iran, Middle East
One Million Voices for Iran