Denying Iran's Democrats

Last night, Congress dealt a severe blow to the democratic aspirations of the Iranian people. By re-appropriating the infamous Iran "Democracy" Fund, Congress showed blatant disregard for the well being and the wishes of Iranian pro-democracy activists.

The $60 million awarded Tuesday as part of the giant FY08 appropriations package is a Congressional nod of approval of the Bush Administration's discredited Iran policy.

Little known in the US, but infamous in Iran, this program is seen as an attempt to affect regime change through Iranian civil society organizations. The Iranian government has used this perceived threat as a pretext to crack down on human rights workers, civil society activists and anyone who dares to question the government or maintain contacts with the West.

Civil society activists arrested by the Iranian authorities have repeatedly been questioned on whether they have accepted State Department funds.

Those at the forefront of the fight for democracy in Iran have refused to accept the funds, and prominent human rights groups, foreign policy experts and Iranian activists have all denounced it. This includes Iranian Nobel Laureate Shirin Ebadi , dissident journalist Akbar Ganji and Iranian-American scholar Haleh Esfandiari.

They have written extensively against the funding and have urged Congress to scrap the program.

Unfortunately, by re-appropriating the fund this year, Congress has shown that the wishes of Iran's pro-democracy leaders matter little to US lawmakers.

Still, Congress has recognized the program has been ineffective and that additional funding is unwarranted. The State Department apparently also agrees, and has taken the administration of the program out of the hands of ideologues in the Department.

Given such strong case against these funds, it is deplorable that Congress would persist to fund it.

But all is not lost. If Congress insists on dismissing the wishes of Iranian pro-democracy activists, the State Department may show greater sensitivity to the concerns of the people the fund purportedly aims to assist.

By refocusing the funds on positive elements of the mandate -- people to people exchanges in various fields such as art, music, sports, and science -- and decreasing the counterproductive elements that have made the work of Iranian activists all the harder, the damage of Congress' unfortunate decision can be minimized.

Dr. Trita Parsi is the author of "Treacherous Alliance - The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran and the U.S." (Yale University Press). He is also the President of the National Iranian American Council. Emily Blout is the Acting Legislative Director at the Council.

Comments

[SamEllison]

I wanted to bring this subject up yesterday to someone defending Hillary's vote for Kyl-Lieberman but it doesn't work well in three or four sentences.

[realitytrumpsbull]

This is too sad/funny/stupid for words. They
should stop ALL foreign aid of all kinds and
just get/let people started solving their own
damn problems, because THAT would be the core
of democracy, not New Democracy(R), Halliburton
Flavor, but actual bona-fide no-governm­ent-doughn­ut democracy. Ya know?

9.17 trillion, and counting. The BS won't
stop until the money does...that's my view,
anyway.

[TribunusPlebis]

There is a contradiction in Mr. Parsi's contention that the U.S. program to help democratic activists in Iran is seen there "as an attempt to affect regime change" and has therefore been rejected by them. If few activists inside Iran have welcomed this support -- in other words, if they don't want it -- then there is no problem. Why, then, is he so concerned that use of the funds will jeopardize activists by triggering repression against them? That must mean that there are dissidents who want the support. If so, shouldn't they be permitted to make their own decision about it? In fact the likelihood of their accepting aid might explain why the regime is so anxious to discredit it. While it is true that admired Iranian human rights leaders like Akbar Ganji doubt that such a program will do much to help democratic reform, that's probably because they realize that the messages and tactics that drive decisive change must come from the people themselves, not from outside. There have been too many historical instances in which specific kinds of external support (like aid to independent media and to the families of imprisoned dissidents) have been eagerly accepted by indigenous activists to claim credibly that any support is too risky to accept. Dissident Polish workers took outside assistance in the 1970s, and it didn't hinder them from helping to power the Solidarity movement a few years later. Chileans who organized against the Pinochet dictatorship accepted American support for election monitoring and campaign advertising, and that didn't harm their cause. The value of U.S. or any nation's aid to civic activists challenging an authoritarian state can only be properly assessed by those who would receive it. One final, important point: The fault for repression directed at dissidents belongs solely to the regime which is persecuting and jailing them, not to organizations or governments who want to help them. There would be fewer risks inherent in accepting outside support from any particular source if more governments, foundations and institutions around the world provided such aid. That's the real problem.

[illit]

I think perhaps, Mr. Parsi, that you've given Congress too much credit - "The $60 million awarded Tuesday as part of the giant FY08 appropriations package is a Congressional nod of approval of the Bush Administration's discredited Iran policy."

You are assuming that they've actually READ the appropriations package. They've got important ROID investigations to pursue.

[Hass]

That's because the NeoCon promoters of this fake "democracy" fund for Iran are ... gasp! shock! ... not in the least bit interested promoting any REAL democracy in the Mideast (far from it!) but instead want to: 1- Promote their own "activists" who are willing to sell themselves for money; and 2- Push aside and discredit the REAL Iranian pro-democracy activisist (who have refused to take the money.)

These NeoCOns don't want an actual democracy in Iran since that would run counter to their interests. What they want instead, under the guise of "democracy promotion" is the installation of a pro-Israeli puppet government in Iran.

Note that's why there there's no democracy promotion fund for Jordan or Saudi Arabia or Azerbaijan or Egypt - all led by far morerepressive but PRO-ISRAEL rulers and tyrants. No, we sell them arms instead.