The problem of Iran
The United Nations Security Council has been wringing its hands for months & months over Iran’s nuclear exploration, and meeting to talk about more talk. They have set deadlines for Iran to cease uranium enrichment and threatened consequences. Iran has continually called their bluff, and the UN keeps regrouping and issuing what amounts to the same threats, always with a pushed out deadline. The latest one has passed, and…now what?
Some members of Congress have thought this through, and at least have a plan to propose. The guys over at powerlineblog.com have been talking with Senator Rick Santorum and they have a post today about his Iran proposal.
Santorum is proposing a three-pronged approach to Iran: a push for free and fair elections; support for pro-democracy groups; and increasingly tough sanctions…
Santorum declined to talk about what the U.S. should or can do if the three-pronged approach fails. This reticence certainly was appropriate in the context of our discussion. However, it’s an issue that I believe the administration will have to confront because I see little hope that the three-pronged approach will work. The mullahs have no intention of holding free and fair elections, and there is no reason to believe that the pro-democracy forces will make headway even if the U.S. provides them with more support, as it should. Successful revolutions just don’t happen very often, and they almost never happen in nations whose power is ascending, as Iran’s is.
Couple of things about this. One is the call-in I heard not long ago on the Limbaugh show in the only ten minutes or so I was tuned in, from an Iranian ex-pat who is now a naturalized American citizen. He gave an interesting account of some non-violent resistance groups currently demonstrating in Iran for free and fair elections and the desire for democracy. Good news that they exist and are active in Iran now.
The other thing is that successful revolutions do happen in repressive regimes. This is detailed in the book A Force More Powerful; A Century of Nonviolent Conflict, by Peter Ackerman and Jack Duvall. Dr. Ackerman was a guest on my radio show in August on this topic, and I brought up the likelihood that these groups in Iran could be successful against the Ahmadinejad regime. He said what it takes is for these groups to combine forces and have the backing they need. When they work in isolation from each other, they don’t have the force that civil disobedience, demonstrations and non-violent resistance can bring when organized, large and well supported.
The Powerline guys see little hope that the threatened sanctions against Iran will have the international backing they need to be effective.
For now, though, Senator Santorum deserves great credit for the leadership he so characteristically is providing in the Senate on this issue.
Somebody in government needs to prompt this along further than it has gone over all these months that Iran has continued with its nuclear program, challenged but unstopped by the West. Sen. Santorum and Powerline’s John Hinderaker have been guests on my show several times as well, and I know they speak strongly about what they believe. They believe these Iran proposals are the best ideas, and it sounds better than anything else put forward. But who has the ability to move them along further?
If the guy who called the Limbaugh show could get in touch with Dr. Akerman and Sen. Santorum, maybe Powerline and InForum will have an Iranian turnaround to report. Stranger things have happened.
