iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Hadi Ghaemi

GET UPDATES FROM Hadi Ghaemi
 

Who Is Afraid of Talking about Iran's Human Rights Crisis?

Posted: 01/14/2011 5:45 pm

Hadi Ghaemi and Aaron Rhodes

As the latest round of negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 group is about to resume, the ongoing human rights crisis in Iran is once more being overshadowed and ignored by the international community.

The question of holding the Islamic Republic of Iran accountable for grave human rights violations has become deeply politicized and distorted. The lives of innocent people are being lost or devastated, victims not only of their own governments' intransigence, but also of confusion and tiresome ideological bickering among international policymakers.

The Iranian government is vulnerable to international criticism regarding human rights and can be pushed to reduce repression on its citizens, but its game of creating conflict, division and confusion has largely succeeded.

Many proponents of negotiations with Iran, who emphasize understanding Iran's need for respect and security in its region, oppose military threats, and find even President Obama's attempts at negotiations lackluster, also oppose demands to hold Iran accountable for its human rights abuses. Typically, they see human rights concerns as obstacles to dialogue, which will isolate Iran. Sometimes, human rights campaigners are even lumped together with warmongering neocons, because in some cases the latter have raised human rights concerns.

Such analysts who are against military confrontation thus downplay focusing on human rights because it is a position held, perhaps disingenuously, by some who favor military confrontation according to the narrow-minded, partisan tribalism infecting Western policy elites. It is not the first time the "peace lobby," which largely overlaps with left-wing orientations, has found itself apologizing for human rights abuses and telling human rights advocates to stop obstructing "engagement" and fueling international conflict.

A similar tendency may be seen among international officials who downplay Iran's human rights crimes, ostensibly because they fear that raising them, which is their duty and responsibility, will become a pretext for an attack on Iran. Officials refer to the fact that proponents of the war to topple Saddam Hussein gave as one of their rationales his government's murder of more than 300,000 innocent Iraqi citizens.

States that reflexively oppose "Western" policies also hide behind this excuse to ignore the abuses in Iran, while some also insist that the government's grotesque mistreatment of its citizens reflects its particular cultural, and thus legitimate approach.

At the same time, those preoccupied with nuclear nonproliferation and/or with Iran's expanding influence around the world also push the question of human rights issues to the side. A general consensus among Western diplomats seems to be that human rights should be kept separate from nuclear negotiations and other security questions, putatively for fear of derailing delicate negotiations or linking human rights to security issues in a way that might suggest bargaining for human rights. Of course, human rights are sadly and routinely bargained away in bilateral relations, especially the rights of people from powerful countries. But with Iran, human rights are not bargained away, they are given away, since the international community gets nothing in return for its silence except scorn.

Finally, the belief that pressure to comply with international human rights norms is a form of political interference in the internal affairs of another country is driving a general US effort to "reset" relationships with Iran and other nondemocratic states, one that has harmed their human rights communities. Those human rights defenders understand that upholding international human rights standards is not the same as interference in the internal affairs of another country.

All of these tendencies regarding addressing Iran's human right violations are illogical and harmful, both to the people of Iran and to the international human rights system. They all show the different ways in which the international community has fallen victim to the Iranian regime's guile.

The international community should learn from the position of Iranian human rights defenders, who have consistently opposed a military attack on their country, but also ask for Iran to be held accountable by international human rights mechanisms.

Iran's bloody human rights violations are a challenge to the integrity of the international system, which, if left unanswered, will encourage other states to follow suit and further threaten international security. Iran is attempting to rewrite and gut the rules on human rights, and, by continuing such practices as stoning people to death and cutting off their limbs as legal punishments, Iran is raising the tolerance threshold of the international community and dragging universal standards down, cheered on by other countries whose rulers can only stay in power if they violate human rights.

Perhaps diplomats would like to compartmentalize human rights and remain silent about the issue during discussions about other topics, but they need to understand that for the Iranian ruling clique, it is all about control. They seek to neutralize both their own people and their critics abroad; so far, the manipulation of anti-Western solidarity, and creating conflict via its nuclear file, have worked perfectly on both scores.

The international community has a choice regarding this manipulation. It should choose a tough human rights engagement line that will show solidarity with the Iranian people. The United Nations' Human Rights Council should end its disturbing silence on the ongoing crisis in Iran and establish a special mechanism to document and report on Iran's widespread violations. In doing so, the Council, as a multi-national body, can show Iran that the international community is serious about the problem and encourage Iran to respect its international obligations.

Hadi Ghaemi is the Executive Director of the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran and Aaron Rhodes is its Policy Advisor.

 
FOLLOW WORLD
 
 
  • Comments
  • 50
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DavidET
Earth has no sides
10:49 AM on 01/15/2011
Excellent article.

´´for the Iranian ruling clique, it is all about control. They seek to neutralize both their own people and their critics abroad; so far, the manipulation of anti-Western solidarity, and creating conflict via its nuclear file, have worked perfectly on both scores.´´
04:41 AM on 01/15/2011
If you guys think Iran has human rights issues you should all come to Toronto Canada next time there is a G20 convention. in the west we are quick at becoming critics but never, I mean never lead by example, not too long ago Natives from a lacross team was prevented from flying to britain to take part in a international event, and human rights watch was none existent, why Iran ?? this smells and feels like dirty money.
02:54 PM on 01/15/2011
Do they kick and beat people people after arresting them, torture them, keep the family unaware of their whereabouts, and sentence them to years in prison without proper jury trials? Just because two things have some flaws doesn't mean they are equal. Your comparison is absurd.
07:30 PM on 01/15/2011
What do you call torture? and where is any evidence of torture? Unlike many western countries, torture is against the law in Iran with no exception. Calling anything torture diminishes when torture really happens. Did some people get roughed up? yes was it proper? no. Did anyone get tortured? no. Try overthrowing your elected government, wherever you are and see what happens to you. Police forces do use physical force to control crowds anywhere. The police forces in the US are trained to shoot to kill if they are threatened or a suspect is in possession of any deadly force and doesn't follow command. The Iranian security forces acted with considerable amount of restraint. Now it has come to light that many of the violent action against the security forces had nothing to do with election but were planned by British embassy to start violent response by police and further confrontation.
06:19 PM on 01/16/2011
to avargas2001: you said " you should come to Toronto Canada next time there is a G20 convention."Tell us if protesters in Canada are asking for their BASIC rights or are they protesting for gathering G20’s agendas/policies? Is anyone arrested or stayed in jail in? If protesters had access to any lawyer they wished or not allowed to a lawyer at all (in Iran some defending lawyers/ families are arrested, simply for representing their clients) If protesters are turtored for confession? have they been sexually assaulted while in custody? if their heads shoved in toilets and beaten up? are they banned being interviewed, travel, their passports confiscated? If their elected government gave money secretly to Hamas, Hezbollah, Iraqi, Karzai, mercenaries etc without anyone’s knowledge, (H.Karzai,received millions of dollar sometimes in burlap sacks without any ones' approval/knowledge, he confessed after reported by NY times') If government(s) refurbished solid golden domes and golden doors in Karbala/ Najafs' shrines,cost millions of dollar, while 40% to 60% Iranian are under poverty line? If government(s) build roads, schools, bridges, houses, parks, hospitals for Lebanese while many Iranian living in tents, or shlters made of galvanized/corrogated boxes without access to drinking water, electricity, no proper roads, no school in vicinity, not enough bridges in many rural areas? You cannot possibly be serious comparing a third world corrupt, back warded, demagogue, dictatorial police state, superstitious regime, acting as representative of the God on earth with Canada, or can you?.
06:00 PM on 01/17/2011
I think you are as confused as they come. You are venting, and have no idea what a government is or what you are talking about. You are just fond of overthrowing an elected government for reasons you are making up as you go along. You also want US and Israel to bomb and nuke Iran in order for that to happen. Go get a life, we don't want another war to be fought on behalf of Israel and drive us bankrupt.
12:47 AM on 01/15/2011
A US based and supported organization doesn't make an Iranian human rights organization.
01:13 AM on 01/15/2011
but the ones which report on gaza are OK?
01:35 AM on 01/15/2011
I go by the ones based in Israel.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Dr. Jonathan David Farley
mathematician
07:31 PM on 01/14/2011
Guantanamo.
08:10 PM on 01/14/2011
The big difference is that Iran is constantly committing human rights violations on its OWN people. And presidential candidates who opposed it are being silenced, instead of being able to win the next round of elections, as was the case in the US.
10:53 PM on 01/14/2011
The part you miss is that, there is a consorted, organized well financed (to the tune of $400 million only by US government) and violent plan to undermine not only the current government of Iran but also to break apart the country as a whole. Vast majority of Iranians don't want to have any part of this. The former presidential candidates are not silenced, they communicate constantly and say whatever they want to say.
06:00 PM on 01/15/2011
so in your mind... doing bad things internally is worse than doing it externally?
I'm afraid I don't buy that logic.

As far as this talk of democracy from the US, why don't you tell that to Mossadeq?