NY Times Op-Ed: “THE Islamic Republic of Iran is not about to implode. Nevertheless, the misguided idea that it may do so is becoming enshrined as conventional wisdom in Washington. For President Obama, this misconception provides a bit of cover; it helps obscure his failure to follow up on his campaign promises about engaging Iran with any serious, strategically grounded proposals. Meanwhile, those who have never supported diplomatic engagement with Iran are now pushing the idea that the Tehran government might collapse to support their arguments for military strikes against Iranian nuclear targets and adopting “regime change†as the ultimate goal of America’s Iran policy.†Read on here.
The radical elements claiming to be a part of the green movement only speak for a small minority of Iranians. The majority still want peaceful reform of the system and not necessarily a wholesale revolution, bloody or otherwise. That’s why, in the most recent Ashura demonstrations, for example, large groups of peaceful marchers actually prevented some of the movement’s radicalized elements from beating or attacking security forces. Although accurate polling information is not available, based on what we hear and see of the leaders of the green movement and many of its supporters, radicalization is still limited to a minority of protesters.
http://www.raceforiran.com/hooman-majd-on-why-a-revolution-is-unlikely
Examples of the conditions I’m referring to include that the Palestinians will have to accept less than 22% of the territory of Palestine for a population about equal in size to the Jewish population, that the country would not have a military, that the country would not control its own borders, that the country would, at Israel’s discretion, have to host foreign troops, that the country would not control its natural resources and that refugees would be formally denied their right to return. Supporters of Israel consider all of these conditions fair. Many Palestinians and their supporters do not. My point here is that Yglesias should be able to anticipate that Palestinians would not consider the imposition of these conditions fair. That he does not is the result of a mental block that clouds his understanding of the region.
http://mideastreality.blogspot.com/2010/01/no-support-for-israel-means-no-911-and.html
Posted on January 8th, 2010 under general with 2 replies.
The Financial Times published an analysis piece yesterday that provides a thorough summary of why the United States appears poised to embark on a course of further sanctions against Iran – and why those sanctions are very unlikely to change Iran’s strategic calculations with regard to its nuclear program.
As the article explains, sanctions are likely to fail for two interrelated reasons. China and Russia will be reluctant to agree to sanctions that threaten either Iran’s gasoline imports (which come in part from China) or arms sales (which come almost exclusively from Russia). Furthermore, even if sanctions could be implemented successfully (a highly doubtful proposition), they would be more likely to boost popular support for the regime than to force the Islamic Republic to capitulate to Western demands. International sanctions on Iran have never worked before and there is no reason to think this time will be any different.
As New America Foundation/American Strategy Program Director and The Washington Note Publisher Steve Clemons notes in the article, “The sanctions path has more to do with providing a focus for American frustration and emotion than achieving a successful course of correction by Iran.â€
The entire article can be read here.
http://www.raceforiran.com/has-obama-done-everything-in-his-power
IRAN WILL NEVER BREAK VIDEO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyYSJKc8xfU
By holding out the illusion of substantial political change in Iran, hawks can push for delaying meaningful negotiations and can gain support for destructive sanctions measures… After all, if Western policymakers start banking on domestic political unrest to undermine the Iranian government in a major way, they will pursue policies that would be very different than if they assume that the current Iranian government is not changing and not going anywhere.
Here we go again..saddam yellowcake wmds..now nytimes is beating the drums of war with iran with new lies
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/01/08/world/AP-Iran-Nuclear.html?_r=1
Pressure transducers have many civilian applications, and are not necessarily used for making “weapons grade uranium” as the Times repeatedly implies!
So as you know there is an ongoing debate about whether Iran is on the brink of imminent regime collapse (participants include the Leveretts and Juan Cole, among others.) I previously pointed out that the media have long predicted an imminent “Second Revolution” in Iran, because of hype and wishful thinking more than anything else. Anyway one of the participants in this debate has stated my view of the whole issue so succinctly that I thought I should link to it (way at the bottom):
“By holding out the illusion of substantial political change in Iran, hawks can push for delaying meaningful negotiations and can gain support for destructive sanctions measures… After all, if Western policymakers start banking on domestic political unrest to undermine the Iranian government in a major way, they will pursue policies that would be very different than if they assume that the current Iranian government is not changing and not going anywhere.”
http://www.iranaffairs.com/iran_affairs/2010/01/the-second-revolution-in-iran-continued.html
There has already been revolution in Iran.. you can put pic of Pasdar in the 2010 box.
You are right that we may or may not face a revolution in Iran. But I am wondering how one provides an opinion to informed readers of NYT while his knowledge about Iran is so lacking. The conclusions are based on several false evidences here. I just provide couple of examples: 1)” Vastly more Iranians took to the streets on Dec. 30, in demonstrations organized by the government …this was possibly the largest crowd in the streets of Tehran since Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s funeral in 1989.” Anyone familiar with Iran knows that Tehran has seen many demos with much larger crowd since 1989! 2)”much of Iranian society was upset by the protesters using a sacred day to make a political statement.” Majority of Iranians who live here- even those who are silent- take any opportunity to speak up and Ashura was not an exception. You have used several invalid statements and provided a misguiding picture of situation.
Arash, I hope this is a study break. Get back to studying you dont want to fail twice.