On my feed (and in my household), there has been fierce debate around this question of what, if anything, the USG should say in response to turmoil in Iran. I come down somewhere in the middle...
With all due respect to the many heroic human rights defenders who want US politicians to offer full-throated moral support & encouragement to protestors, I’m deeply cynical about the prospects for Washington to shape dynamics on the ground in a positive fashion
Again, w/respect & sympathy, I’ve never heard anyone explain how a more robust Obama response to the emergence of the Green Movement in 2009 would have changed the outcome.
But I’ve also come to question my former assumptions, shared by many academics & other Iran watchers, that US advocacy would taint & compromise the very Iranian activists we’re trying to help.
The reality is that much of Iran’s leadership is convinced that opposition is, by definition, a foreign-inspired & driven conspiracy. Khamenei even saw Obama’s engagement as an insidious ploy to promote a soft revolution.
Under these circumstances, it’s hard to see that American reticence would offer any meaningful protection to Iranian activists.
Some say that Iranians don't want USG sympathy; advocates themselves may resent American policies & historical legacy in Iran. An American embrace may seem to them like a kiss of death.
Others articulate an opposing view: that American advocacy can sustain and inspire embattled activists, bolster a movement if/as the regime cracks down.
Either way, there is a compelling US interest in embracing popular efforts to curtail authoritarianism in the Middle East. That's why Washington pressured its closest allies in 2011 over street protests. To stand back now would be absurd.
And here's the thing: whatever the USG does or doesn't say about these protests, the reality is (as @POTUS tweeted) that the world is watching what happens in Iran. How Tehran responds to the current protests will shape its relationship w/the world, just as it did in 2009.
That's one of several reasons why a Clinton administration would have spoken out at least as quickly as the Trump administration did. As former SecState Clinton did tonight:
Personally I wish the debate about USG statements would move from words to deeds: what can Washington do that is constructive in this environment? I'll retweet a few suggestions I've seen here & add one of my own. Please chime in w/ideas.
.@AlirezaNader on keeping communications channels open
.@maziarbahari on the need for satellite internet connections
.@memarsadeghi on warning of consequences for repression
.@RichardHaass on disseminating info re costs of Iran's regional adventurism
I'll add, there's one screamingly obvious step that the Trump admin can & should take to signal support for Iranians, irrespective of what happens w/these protests: lift the travel ban. Now even more than ever, banning Iranians from the US is unjustified, unnecessary, an affront.
