Freedom of speech

[Az]

Neither do I. I think we should actively (and not morally ) support any anti-ayatollah movements there.

[duke o' york]

Why not both?

Sanctions are only worthwhile against regimes against whom there are credible and relatively powerful resistance movements. If the ruling party who control all of the wealth don't care about the people, then they will happily continue their regime despite sanctions that kill their people up to the point at which they can no longer have what they are used to, even by the black market - which is a long time indeed, and a terrible waste of innocent lives, given how the ruling powers tend to be the richest, and the black marketeers the least caring as to where they make their profits.

[Spiffor]

Indeed. I certainly wouldn't mind an orange revolution in Iran, or similar.

However, I don't think it can happen without a bloodbath.


I wonder also if a gentlemen's agreements with the Mullahs is possible. From what I understand, they are now an established ruling elite, who hold economic power as well as the political one. Ahmadinejad might be a danger to this establishment, becase he brings hostile international attention to the entire regime, and because his government is mostly made of civilians instead of Mullahs.

There are quite a few "reform" Mullahs in Iran, just like there were "reform" commies in the late USSR. Maybe it's more reasonable to strike deals with the establishment so that it doesn't get overrun by the extremes.

[Az]

I just loooove this "as long as they torture and opress only the local population we are fine"

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Az
I just loooove this "as long as they torture and opress only the local population we are fine"

I don't think exactly like that. I think that the Mullah's power can become irrelevant with time, and if they don't get overun by their extremes. Unlike Ukraine (where Kuchma has shown much restraint during the orange revolution), I don't see an Iranian revolution occuring without a bloodbath, which would be worse than what the regime currently does IMO.

I think the Mullahs can become an established regime that makes progressive transition toward democracy, if their actual power gets challenged in the right amount (ie strong structural pressures from within and without, but not to the point of a successful revolution or regime change). That could lead them to become a kind of "constitutional theocracy", similar to the constitutional monarchies of today.

The revolutionary experiences in the past show how dangerous revolutions are to the common man. As to a forceful regime change from a foreign power, well, it doesn't seem to work too well in this day and age.