Obama Has It Right on Iran -- and the Right Doesn't

Over the past few days, President Obama has been pummeled by the right for supposedly appeasing the regime in Iran. Robert Kagan has accused Obama of being "objectively" on the side of the mullahs, while Charles Krauthammer detects a president "afraid to take sides between the head-breaking, women-shackling exporters of terror--and the people in the street yearning to breathe free."

Don't believe a word of it. The truth is that Obama has correctly followed a prudent course of allowing the protests to build in Iran, while scrupulously refraining from giving the mullahs a convenient fig-leaf for the crackdown that may well be coming. There is a fine line between supporting and inciting the demonstrators, and Obama has not overstepped it. What's more, America doesn't have a history in Iran. It has a rap sheet, dating back to the CIA's engineering of the 1953 coup that established a pro-American government led by the Shah.

So Obama's statement today warning the Iranian leadership that the "world is watching" hit the appropriate note. Not intervening. But watching. Should the Iranian authorities resort to force, they could trigger upheaval that might bring themselves down in the chaos. At a minimum, they will permanently discredit themselves.

What no one knows, however, is the extent to which the regime will go to try and defend its power and privileges, but it could be very, very far. The analogy with Eastern Europe in 1989 doesn't quite work. The Warsaw pact countries were led by old, doddering leaders who had relied upon the Soviet Union to prop them up. Iran is different. It has been seeking to expand its influence in the Arab world, much to the fear of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and other countries.

For now, power is in the streets with the courageous demonstrators who are demonstrating that the regime has lost what legitimacy it ever commanded. Contrary to the dreams of Krauthammer and Co., however, America does not have the ability to determine events in Iran. More important than what America does is what it does not do. Iran is too important to posture for cheap political gain. Obama understands that. His critics don't.

Comments

[citizensrus]

I do think President Obama is being advised by the best and he's smart or humble enought to take this advice.
If I recall, Bush was well advised against going to war in Iraq, even his own father advised him against it..yet he ignored the advise given him.
Did he listen to the neocons? Yes.
Well, President Obama is not a neoconservative.

[CanisLatrans]

People forget that the Republicans want Achmedinijad to win. He is a very handy enemy-- he's nationalistic, hate-mongering, rhetoric-twisting nut that is easy to use as a bogeyman to justify American aggression.

He fits perfectly with what the GOP wants.

[ModernTimes1]

Reality meets Canis.....
Small problem: Republican Congress initiated and overwhelmingly voted to censure Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah II
Think before posting.

[joefrat]

What our President needs to be doing is speaking more about the forces of freedom and democracy, and reiterate the stance of the of the United States against tyranny in all its forms. Obama, as eloquent a speaker as he is, can send a message to Iran and the world, that the US will refuse to recognize Amadinejad as the leader of this country in its current form, and will therefore refuse to negotiate with him. Unfortunately, I feel Obama's presently weak silence just shows that he wants to back a winner, in Amadinejad. Think about it, a big part of his foreign policy position is to hold negotiations with the guy.

[ModernTimes1]

Certainly Obama careful statements are designed as a waiting tactic to see who comes out on top.
And why not.

[zensistah]

Great post! This is the reason we elected President Obama. He thinks like he's playing chess (thinking 10-12 moves ahead and the possible outcomes of each move) while Repubs think like their playing checkers (jump over the little guys just to become kings!). We tried belicose and beligerent for 8 years and intervention into foreigh countries. And see where that got us! Arrogance is so 20th century. Let Iran handle it's own business in it's own house as we keep a weathered eye on the situation. When I say McCain spouting off on the Today show about condeming the elections in Iran I knew that he doesn't have the mental motherboard to handle this. And I am sick of the Repub talking points trying to justify intervention--all those old men should remember what happened the last time we intervened in 1953 (?). They need to collectively shut up and grow up while the adults in the room clean up their mess and try to pull the ship of state out of the Marianas trench.

[ModernTimes1]

Chess?
To-date Obama is playing e2-e4. Pretty pedestrian move.

[FloridaBlogger]

Joe Scarborough broadcasting "Morning Joe" from here in Pensacola, Florida came out and strongly supported President Obama's position on the Iranian crisis today. He also harshly criticized the Republicans who have been criticizing Obama. Go figure.

Check out the video of Scarborough here: http://bloggingdemocratic.blogspot.com

[Mildmannered]

The "right" does not understand­/acknowled­ge that Obama's Cairo speech was one of the major sparks for the demonstrations, and give Obama credit for it.

[FloridaBlogger]

Good point! Actually Joe Scarborough made the same argument this morning on MSNBC. I posted the link to the video in my comment directly above yours.

[BlackJAC]

The gops are simply attention-seeking reflexive contrarians. They were quick to Cut & Run in Bosnia and Somalia simply because Clinton was for Staying The Course there, so this is no surprise.

[Pleneras]

These people are not fighting against a regime change. Theirs is a political dispute period. Anyone else trying to make this a revolution is wrong. CNN's interview this morning got it right while the rest of the media is playing the little they know to "their" advantage.

[Macready]

great blog . . . totally agree with you . . America has a rap sheet in Iran . . . what is happening is internal . . . can you imagine what the neo cons would have done if Iran has commented on the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections?????????? the mind boggles . . .

[SonnyBono]

"America doesn't have a history in Iran. It has a rap sheet" - spot on, Mr. Heilbrunn - the biggest problem from the US side remains that the right wing has never met a war it didn't love. Why I'll bet if we went to war with Iran, even Chuckie Krauthammer would be willing to strap a couple of Hellfire missiles to the sides of his wheel chair and go on the attack - of course, I'm kidding - Krauthammer like his fellow neocons Cheney, Kristol and the rest of the should be going to the Hague gang are always otherwise occupied when the real shooting starts - love the war - hate the possibility of getting anywhere near the actual dying.

[dontomas]

Speaking as an elder, I think any regime that restricts freedom or dictates daily life will end. Young people are much smarter than in pre internet days and information is widely distributed by electronic media and devices. The leaders in Iran must know this, their archaic form of Plutocracy is ending. For the US to just be an observer along with the rest of the world until this turmoil points one way or another is the only way we can react at this time. If human rights get out of hand there will be a large coalition of counties to police Iran, unlike Iraq that was not at this critical mass of public discontent. I shudder to think how Bush/Cheney would have handled this.

[tjinc]

I agree with dontomas. I would add that there are some republican leaders who know full well how disastrous it would be for our President to be viewed as encouraging revolution in Iran.

This is just another example of the repubs are trying to maneuver this administration into failure.

President Obama is too wise and prudent a person to fall into that trap.

I am so relieved we don't have the old regime in place.

[syllepsis]

The Republicans are now the most ardent interventionists in existence. Of course it is purely opportunistic and the country that is intervened in doesn't matter- "We are all Iranians," "We are all Georgians," etc.
It is the Republican scam we have seen too often now- cynicism posing as idealism.

[Sam Sedaei - Huffpost Blogger]

Jacob, I usually like your writings. But I'm afraid you got this one wrong, although I see the false comfortable in thinking Obama is doing the right thing. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-sedaei/obama-must-speak-up-quick_b_218513.html

[lady49]

Are you KIDDING ME?!
Of course President Obama is doing the right thing!!!!!
If you were living in Iran or had a strong idea of what President Obama is saying, I could respect your opinion..

Here is a question for you......How many Iranian citizens would you like to see jailed because they listened to President Obama?
The current leadership in Iran is just WAITING for something to accuse the United States for meddling. They hate the old US under the Bush Administration... they hate our history of interference with the region.
If the Iranians think President Obama is doing the right thing-- who are you to suggest differently?

[lady49]

Jacob is EXACLTY right Sam... you've got it wrong...

[Pleneras]

He's right! The dispute is over their choice of leader not FREEDOM. They have their freedom. Maybe not your kind of freedom but they are satisfied and educated and do not want to live like Americans wasting their time with junk tv and living in a me me me society with politicians calling women who are PR judges racists.

Let's just show Hugh Hefner's show over there and surely they'll want to be just like us.

[wanttruth]

Great column.

[gawd]

You are so right, we do not have a history we have a rap sheet. Obama is doing the right thing.

[winstonian22]

Yeah. America has never done anything to make the world a better place. you'er totally right. World War I? Sinister. World War II? Evil. Ending the cold war? despicable. Sending billions of dollars to fight AIDS in Africa? Appauling.

You're totally right. The world would be better off with our country. So, are you saying you wawnt Ameria to fail?

[KKojei]

Except for the grace of God, there goes the U.S. in Iran. In fact our peaceful transfer of power, a remarkable and wonderful example given how terribly polarized our leadershipand our country is, has become a powerful example. The winds of change are blowing across the planet. Any leadership who defies the will of its people with fraud, repression and violence will fall. I said it a long time ago. We don't need to send troops anywhere to replace governments. What is happening in Iran would have happened in Iraq ultimately and Saddam would have had to go. Like these folks have to go. The only time we need to invade any country is when their leadership decides to construct and use weapons that threaten the planet and its populations generally. Even then, we have the capability of extracting just the leaders without bombing populations and it should be done that way. Ultimately, we all want to live peaceful and productive lives without interference from freaking shepherds!!!! As the beautiful people of Iran said it: WE ARE NOT SHEEP!!!!!!

[dragonlady620]

Well said.