6/22/09

A clear bipartisan consensus among national security leaders and Iran experts –Brzezinski, Kissinger, Baker and Scowcroft – as well as traditional conservatives such as Richard Lugar, George Will and Peggy Noonan in support of President Obama’s approach to the situation in Iran. Last week’s Congressional resolutions were supported by the White House and almost identical to its statements. Yet media coverage is driven by the partisanship of a group of grandstanding conservatives. The activism they advocate would play directly into the hands of the Iranian regime, which is desperate to portray the demonstrations as the product of western meddling. Their calls are politically motivated and reflective of a reckless Bush-era foreign policy approach, which resulted in the tarnishing of America’s image and real reversals for democracy around the world. While conservatives have claimed that Obama is undercutting the demonstrators, their claims are divorced from the reality of what is happening on the ground – the protests have strengthened in resolve. Additionally, neither Mousavi nor the demonstrators on the streets have asked for heightened US involvement.  The Obama administration must continue its current approach and ignore the cries that would only play into the hands of the Iranian regime.

Bi-partisan consensus supports Obama administration’s handling of the ongoing crisis in Iran.  The Obama administration’s plan for dealing with the Iran crisis – supporting the rights of the demonstrators while refusing to let the U.S. become a ‘political football’ for the regime – has received strong backing from progressives, foreign policy experts, conservative political leaders and commentators, and Iran experts:

Senior National Security Leaders:

• Former Carter National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski: “I think on this, he has struck absolutely the right note. He's offering moral sympathy. He's identifying himself morally, historically with what is happening in Iran.  But he's not engaging himself politically. He's not interfering, because that would turn badly. And it could be exploited by the neocons in Iran to crush the revolution, to wipe it out.” [Former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, GPS, 6/21/09]

• Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger: “I think the president has handled this well. Anything that the United States says that puts us totally behind one of the contenders, behind Mousavi, would be a handicap for that person. And I think it’s the proper position to take that the people of Iran have to make that decision.” [Henry Kissinger, 6/17/09]

• Former Secretary of State James Baker: "If we're out there, beating up on them, criticizing, they'll just say, 'This is the Great Satan.'" Baker added, "A president has to walk a very fine line here, particularly when the revolution was built on anti-American sentiment." [Dallas Morning News, 6/19/09]

• Former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft: Brent Scowcroft, the former Republican White House national security adviser who has emerged as a leading critic of such policies, said in an interview that the Obama administration should continue a cautious approach and that criticism from opponents "is not carefully thought out." "I think the administration is about right in their reaction," he said. "We have to keep our eye on the ball. While it would be comforting to blast what is happening over there, you have to ask how it would help matters. A more belligerent tone would not be helpful."[WS Journal, 6/20/09]

• Former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nick Burns: "President Ahmadinejad would like nothing better than to see aggressive statements, a series of statements, from the United States which try to put the US at the center of this.” [Former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nick Burns, 6/16/09]

• Former senior government official and New York Times Columnist Les Gelb: “Republican leadership calls for Obama to condemn Iran's election results and speak out for the demonstrators shows no knowledge of Iran whatsoever. If he did so, America would become the issue in Iran, not Ahmadinejad, and we would become the excuse and justification for spilling Iranian blood.  These sniping remarks by Republican leaders also show that they put pandering to their right wing above American national security. Why can't they listen to their own real foreign policy expert -- Senator Richard Lugar -- and see and say that the U.S. must exercise restraint in our public statements for Iran's sake and our own.” [Les Gelb, 6/18/09]
  

Conservatives:

• Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN), Ranking Member, Senate Foreign Relations Committee: “When popular revolutions occur, they come really from the people. They’re generated by people power within the country. For us to become heavily involved in the election at this point is to give the clergy an opportunity to have an enemy…and to use us, really, to retain their power.” [Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN), 6/16/09]

• Conservative Senators Mel Martinez (R – FL,), Bob Corker (R – TN), John Thune (R – SD), and Lamar Alexander (R – TN):  According to an article in the Politico last week, Senators Mel Martinez (R – FL,), Bob Corker (R – TN), John Thune (R – SD), and Lamar Alexander (R – TN) all support the President’s approach for dealing with Iran.  [The Politico, 6/17/09]

• Washington Post columnist George Will: “The president is being roundly criticized for insufficient, rhetorical support for what’s going on over there. It seems to me foolish criticism. The people on the streets know full well what the American attitude toward the regime is. And they don’t need that reinforced.” [George Will, ABC News, 6/21/09]

• Conservative Commentator Pat Buchanan: “When your adversary is making a fool of himself, get out of the way... U.S. fulminations will change nothing in Tehran. But they would enable the regime to divert attention to U.S. meddling in Iran’s affairs and portray the candidate robbed in this election, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, as a poodle of the Americans.” [Pat Buchanan, 6/16/09]

• Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan:  “To insist the American president, in the first days of the rebellion, insert the American government into the drama was shortsighted and mischievous. The ayatollahs were only too eager to demonize the demonstrators as mindless lackeys of the Great Satan Cowboy Uncle Sam, or whatever they call us this week. John McCain and others went quite crazy insisting President Obama declare whose side America was on, as if the world doesn't know whose side America is on.” [Peggy Noonan, 6/19/20]
  

Iran experts:

• National Iranian American Council President and Iran Expert Trita Parsi: “Well, let's first think about this, they're coming out and they're saying that they should be siding with the opposition, siding with Mousavi. I'm really curious to know if they actually have been in contact with Mousavi and asked Mousavi if he thinks that that's a good idea.  That's the test we failed in the past, in the sense that we've made up our mind of what they should want and then we act. And then, even if it doesn't work out the way we hope for, we think that is their fault that they didn't understand how genuinely positive our intentions were.  We can't do it this way. I think it's quite reckless to turn a political football into this here in the United States, where in reality, it could have severe repercussions on the streets of Tehran, if the protests are being cast as being orchestrated from the United States.” [Trita Parsi, 6/16/09]

• Iran Expert and Former NSC Official Gary Sick: “Anything we do or say is going to be interpreted in Iran as interference in their domestic affairs and it will tarnish anyone who is in anyway seen as being supported by the United States.” [Gary Sick, 6/15/09]

• Carnegie Endowment Iran Expert Karim Sadjadpour: “[W]e don't want to denounce these elections and insert ourselves into that political process which is playing out in Tehran. Historically, we have unwittingly hurt those whom we've tried to help in the past.” [Carnegie Endowment Iran Expert Karim Sadjadpour, 6/15/09]

• Spokesman for the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran Hadi Ghaemi:  “It is better for the U.S. not to comment and make itself part of the equation… By supporting one faction versus another, the U.S. would not be helpful at all.” [Spokesman for the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran Hadi Ghaemi, 6/15/09]
  

   
Despite broad support for Administration’s strategy, ideologically driven neoconservatives politicize Iran debate in order to attack President.  The press has sought to depict the debate over Iran as a fierce battle between Obama and conservatives. But the debate is really only with a group of extreme partisan ideologues who seek to oppose President Obama at every step and advance a failed Bush-era foreign policy approach.  Last week’s Congressional resolutions on Iran almost mirrored completely the statements from the White House. As Robert Gibbs noted, “I think the language in the resolution is very consistent with the language that the President has used.” Yet the press and extreme conservatives portrayed them as a condemnation of Obama. Senator John McCain (R – AZ) argued on Face the Nation, “the United States hasn’t done anything, except to -- what we should do, and that is, as we did in the Congress on Friday, and that was a joint resolution, Congressman Berman and Pence in the House and Senator Lieberman and me in the Senate, again reaffirming our conviction that people have the right to peacefully disagree with their government.”  Prominent neocons have joined their ideological compatriots in congress to stand outside the bi-partisan consensus.  Last week, Bill Kristol, Robert Kagan, Charles Krauthammer, Paul Wolfowitz and Danielle Pletka all published columns attacking the Administration. As regional experts and senior leaders such as Brzezinski, Scowcroft and Lugar have noted, their calls for direct US involvement would only play into the Iranian regimes hands and undermine the demonstrators. Perhaps most important,  there have been no calls from Mousavi or other reformist leaders, or the protestors on the ground in Iran, for the U.S. to become more involved. [Robert Gibbs, 6/19/09. Fox News, 6/21/09. AP, 6/21/09. Sen. John McCain, 6/21/09. Bill Kristol, 6/14/09. Danielle Pletka and Ali Alfoneh, NY Times, 6/17/09. Robert Kagan, 6/17/09. Paul Wolfowitz, 6/19/09. Charles Krauthammer, 6/19/09]

Contrary to the neocons’ arguments, the protestors are continuing their actions – and outside observers believe Obama’s prior actions actually strengthened reformers’ hand. Throughout the crisis,neocons have claimed that President Obama’s response emboldens the Iranian regime and undermines the demonstrators.  For example, House minority whip Eric Cantor said a week ago, “The Administration's silence in the face of Iran's brutal suppression of democratic rights represents a step backwards for homegrown democracy in the Middle East.”  Yet a week after Cantor’s statement, protests have continued and even strengthened in Iran, despite the regime’s crackdown.  The New York Times reports, “Police officers used sticks and tear gas to force back thousands of demonstrators under plumes of black smoke in the capital on Saturday, a day after Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said there would be ‘bloodshed’ if street protests continued over the disputed presidential election. The violence unfolded on a day of extraordinary tension across Iran. The opposition leader, Mir Hussein Moussavi, appeared at a demonstration in southern Tehran and called for a general strike if he were to be arrested. ‘I am ready for martyrdom,’ he told supporters.” And the New York Daily News reports that protests are to continue Monday, “In Tehran on Sunday, the streets were quiet for the first time in a week, but the city was bracing for more unrest today when thousands are expected to mourn the girl's [Neda’s] death. ‘To protest against lies and fraud is your right,’ opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi told his followers in a statement.” Furthermore – far from undermining the protesters – Obama’s efforts to reduce the animosity between the U.S. and Iran have made it harder to the Iranian regime to depict the US as Iran’s enemy. As Zbigniew Brzezinski noted yesterday, “I think Obama has redefined America's relationship with Islam. And thereby, he has weakened the capacity of the ayatollahs to present us as a satanic force.” Nick Burns also noted that Obama has effectively “put Ahmadinejad on [the] defensive prior to this election because of our ability now to open up the vista for the possibility of negotiations.” [Eric Cantor, 6/15/09. NY Times, 6/20/09. New York Daily News, 6/22/09.  GPS, 6/21/09. Former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nick Burns, 6/11/09]

What We’re Reading

Opposition protesters stayed off the streets of Iran as security forces dramatically increased their presence. Family members of prominent opposition supporter Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani were arrested over the weekend. Still, the Guardian Council, the body of clerics which oversaw the election, admitted there were electoral irregularities in over 50 Iranian cities. Both sides claim the mantle of Islam. Israeli politicians begin to openly support the aspirations of protesting Iranians. Experts also claim that Iran is using sophisticated internet spying technology to not just block information, but track individual Iranians.

A US naval ship is shadowing a North Korean freighter as it delivers suspected missile components to the military regime in Myanmar. This is a first test of the latest round of sanctions against North Korea.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev proposed dramatic cuts in his country’s nuclear stockpile, while the President of the Russian region of Ingushetia survived an assassination attempt which killed four of his bodyguards.

The US Commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, set up new restrictions against the use of airstrikes while the Pakistani Army attempts to consolidate tactical gains against the Taliban within their own country. Mullah Omar, the head of the Afghan Taliban, is said to now assert more operational control over Taliban fighters as they prepare for upcoming US troop deployments.

The former President of Zambia awaits the verdict in his trial, where he is accused of stealing over a half million dollars.

A recent study says Thai Islamic rebels are actively recruiting from Islamic schools within the country. However, no ties to Al-Qaeda have been established.

The trial for the lone surviving gunman of the Mumbai massacre begins today.

Greenland begins to assert autonomy from Danish administration, in the start of a possible bid for independence.

Commentary of the Day

E.J. Dionne Jr. explains why progressives are the natural allies of the Iranian opposition, and former Bush administration official Paul J. Saunders explains why Obama’s critics on Iran are wrong to portray Obama as “siding with the regime.” Meanwhile, Thomas Barnett argues in Esquire that Obama should allow Iran’s “Red State” regime to die on its own.

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari discusses why Pakistan and Afghanistan remain the forefront of global terror and must remain a priority, despite the progress Coalition and Pakistani troops are making against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

Clive Cook at the Financial Times worries that President Obama’s recently proposed financial regulations do not go far enough in protecting the global economy from future crises.

The Economist profiles Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s evolution from Obama’s fiercest opponent to one of his closest allies.