It would be nice if you actually posted the suggestions in addition to providing the link but for everyone else here they are summarized: [rquoter]1. First, Mr. Obama should contact Mr. Mousavi to signal his interest in the situation and Mr. Mousavi's security. Our own experience with dissidents around the world is that proof of concern by the U.S. government is helpful and desirable. The administration was wise to send Vice President Joe Biden to Beirut on the eve of the Lebanese elections, and his presence there helped galvanize the anti-Hezbollah coalition. Mr. Obama's political capital in the region has only expanded since his June 4 Cairo address. If Mr. Mousavi deems talking to the American president not to be politically helpful, then he can refuse the call. But that should be a judgment for him to make. 2. Second, Mr. Obama should deliver another taped message to the Iranian people. Only this time he should acknowledge the fundamental reality that the regime lacks the consent of its people to govern, which therefore necessitates a channel to the "other Iran." He should make it clear that dissidents and their expatriate emissaries should tell us what they most need and want from the U.S. This could consist of financial resources, congresses of reformers, workshops or diplomatic gatherings. The key is to let the reformers call the shots and indicate how much and what U.S. assistance they want. Simply knowing we care, that we are willing to deploy resources and are watching their backs -- to the extent we can -- often helps reformers. The 2004 Orange Revolution in Ukraine is a model. In that case the West joined Ukrainians in refusing to accept the results of a stolen election. This combined effort helped to force a final run-off vote that reflected the people's will. In Iran, this would mean not only redoing elections but also allowing a full field of candidates to run. As with Ukraine and the Soviet Union before, Mr. Obama could at least make it clear that the U.S. will separate the issues of engagement and legitimacy. Our engagement of the Soviet Union in arms-control talks did not prevent us from successfully pressing human-rights issues and seeking an alternative political structure. So it can be with Iran. Engagement without an effort to talk to the "other Iran" would not only be a travesty but tactically foolish as well. 3. Third, the president should direct U.S. ambassadors in Europe and the Gulf to meet with local Iranian anti-regime expatriates. From London to Dubai there are large Iranian communities throughout Europe and the Persian Gulf. The symbolism of this would be powerful, but this should be more than just a photo-op. Expatriates tend to know far more about their countries than even our intelligence experts -- and they could help guide efforts to aid reform. 4. Fourth, additional funding should be provided immediately for Radio Farda, an effective Persian-language radio, Internet and satellite property of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Farda helps Iranians get the information and analytical context that is often denied to them by their own government. 5. Fifth, the administration should take steps to give Iranian reformers and dissidents a level playing field with the regime in the battle of ideas. Just as providing photocopiers and fax machines helped Solidarity dissidents in communist Poland in the 1980s, today's reformers need access to the Web and other means of communication. Grants should be given to private groups to develop and field firewall-busting technology. Money should be appropriated for an NGO-run "open window" platform that enables a wide variety of indigenous voices to be carried on radio, blogs, video clips and other media. This can take the form of satellite and terrestrial broadcasting and other information tools to provide Iranians with anonymous communications and access to Internet, television and radio content that their government attempts to deny them. The president should also call a White House meeting of the CEOs of Facebook, Twitter, Google and other video-sharing and social-networking companies. Entrepreneurially minded high-tech companies can manage this project better than the government. Many of these CEOs are strong supporters of Mr. Obama; they should be brought on board to help make his foreign policy succeed. In the meantime, the president should order the military to make some of its EC-130 "Commando Solo" aircraft, which serve as flying television and radio stations, available to enable reformers and protest leaders to speak directly to the Iranian people. [/rquoter] I agree those do seem like commonsense solutions but if that is what you are advocating they are already being done to varying extents.
You are such a disingenuous tool. In the past you have advocated for a very hard line to be held against Iran and backed a president and presidential candidate that advocated for bombing Iran if necessary. And you have the temerity to question Obama? (who BTW according to many observers has once again handled the situation perfectly)
I'm not sure Dan senor has a lot of cred regarding that part of the world, but I'll play along... First, there are no "model" movements. Each one is unique and affected by the country's history and the people who live there. The Ukraine and Iran are nothing alike. Second they say only approved candidates ran, but Obama should send a signal to dissidents. Strange, but does anyone without a current clearance know whether Obama has contacted or had someone contact Mousavi or his people? It would surprise me greatly if this contact has not already taken place at some level. The publicizing of this contact would probably do more harm than good within Iran, so it's no surprise the administration isn't bragging about it (if it did happen). Third, a taped message? Seriously? Few other things could galvanize fence-sitters to the opposition more quickly. The smart play is to stay quiet. I bet most Iranians know and understand that the United States has a concern about the outcome. You don't need to antagonize people unnecessarily. And really, this sounds like more of something a Republican president would do to play to his base instead of a strategic national interest undertaking. Fourth, on ex-pats, see point three. Again, something the Repubs would do in their eternal search for an Iranian Curveball and a search for a future puppet leader like Chalabi. Fifth, Radio Farda. Radio Farda is already funded by the US and their web site is blocked in Iran. It is widely seen as propaganda. An increase in propaganda is exactly what is not needed at this time. Sixth, regarding computer support for dissidents, my guess is that some of this is ongoing, but not publicized. And really, why the conflation of dissidents with Mousavi? Yes, he'd be better than the current guy we all think, but he is nowhere close to being a dissident. The language, I think, is intentional and fulfills some right-wing yearning but I have a hard time seeing the resemblance between Solzhenitsyn and Mousavi.
well, if you're going to get blamed for intolerable meddling anyway, might it not be time to create some actual mischief? [rquoter]Iran protests "interventionist" U.S. statements Wed Jun 17, 2009 4:08pm EDT Email | Print | Share | Reprints | Single Page [-] Text [+] TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran's Foreign Ministry summoned the Swiss ambassador, who represents U.S. interests in Tehran, on Wednesday to protest at "interventionist" U.S. statements on the country's election, Fars News Agency reported. The Foreign Ministry communicated Iran's "protest and displeasure" over statements by U.S. government officials about the outcome of last week's presidential vote, Iran's semi-official news agency said. In Washington, the White House said President Barack Obama will continue to defend the right of Iranians to peacefully protest the outcome of the election without "meddling" in Iran's internal debate. "The people of Iran reserve the right to have their voices heard and their votes counted," said U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. "The outcome of any election should reflect the will of the people and it is for the Iranians to determine how they resolve this internal protest concerning the outcome of the recent election." The State Department strongly rejected claims that the U.S. was interfering in the disputed June 12 election, pointing out that diplomats from other countries had also been summoned. "I suspect we are in good company," said State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley. "This is not about the United States." A senior Canadian diplomat in Tehran had also been called in to the ministry, Fars News Agency said. On Tuesday, several European ambassadors were also summoned. Major Western nations have questioned the fairness of the official vote results which showed hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had won a landslide against moderate Mirhossein Mousavi. The result sparked days of protests in Tehran and elsewhere. U.S. President Barack Obama said the upheaval showed that "Iranian people are not convinced with the legitimacy of the election." "The president will continue to express those concerns and ensure that we're not meddling," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters on Wednesday. "Obviously, there is international concern for the way an election was conducted, and it's being looked into, and certainly we believe rightfully so," Gibbs said. Crowley said it was up to Iran to resolve concerns over the election in a credible, transparent and peaceful way. "As the president has said repeatedly, we have serious concerns about what is going on. It is up to the Iranian government to address these in a credible way, and we will be watching closely," said Crowley. The United States severed ties with Tehran shortly after Iran's 1979 Islamic revolution. After he took office in January, Obama has offered a new beginning of engagement with Iran if it "unclenches its fist."[/rquoter]
So your rationale is that meddling is actually hurting our interests in Iran, why not do more of it, on a larger scale. Very shrewd.
It's a beautiful thing, because Obama is doing nothing, the leadership around sounds even more ridiculous trying to blame the uprising as an orchestration of the U.S. I think Iran is in for another revolution.
nothin' from nothin leaves nothin' [rquoter]Obama throughout History On the Sack of Rome: "Any time a major urban area is plundered so quickly, it is concerning to us. We are sure the Gauls and Chieftain Brennus understand Roman worries about the utter devastation of their city." On the Blitz: "Any time a city is bombed for 57 straight nights, we take notice. That is something that interests us. We hope all national air forces involved in this dismaying conflict behave responsibly." On the creation of the Berlin Wall: "Any time a barrier divides people we get worried, and perhaps even chagrined. We hope all Germans can work this out amicably, and agree on construction standards and building materials going forward. We, as Americans, stand ready to observe closely." On the boat-people exodus from Vietnam: "Any time people resort to watercraft in such numbers that is certainly notable. I'm sure the Provisional Revolutionary Government of the Republic of South Vietnam will work with its duly constituted maritime authorities to resolve this matter in a manner satisfactory to all parties.”[/rquoter]
Obama addresses the Iranian people, with a shout out to Ron Artest. [rquoter]Hail to the Victors A Special Message to the People of Iran By Barack Obama President of the United States Greetings. As president of United States -- or, if you prefer, the Great Satan -- I have have been following with keen interest the vigorous post-election debate and vibrant political dialogue which has been taking place in your great and noble Islamic Republic of Iran over recent days. It has been both educational and fascinating, and as a sports fan I have thrilled to the pageantry, the suspense, and the fast-paced, hard-hitting action. I have to say It's been as exciting as a double overtime game seven NBA final between the Lakers and Celtics! Like millions of others around the world, I can't wait for the exciting conclusion of your distracting nail-biter so I can finally focus on my big health care project at the office. (Now that's what I call a real crisis!) But no matter who prevails in your hard-fought contest, you can rest assured that I will be out there in the stands watching, and ready to congratulate the team who brings home Tehran's coveted Golden Centrifuge Cup. Now, I know that our two nations have had our differences in the past, and so it would be totally understandable if some of you were possibly upset my previous statements expressing "troubled concern" and "measured consternation" over your current situation. Please, do not interpret those statements as somehow taking one side or the other. I was not trying to be provocative or inflammatory, and far be it from me to interfere or play favorites. As we say over here in the Great Satan, "I don't have a dog in this fight," and so I was merely "calling 'em like I see 'em." Frankly, if America is going to regain respect as a geopolitical superpower, we need to make the tough call to sit quietly on the sidelines. That's why I have instructed my diplomatic team remain strictly neutral and to "let 'em play." With time and patience, I hope you will come to think of us as a bigger, flatter version of Switzerland. With less yodeling. To clarify, my only real concern is over sportsmanship. In democracies like ours elections can sometimes be difficult and messy. "Politics ain't beanbag," as we also say over here. As I learned on the basketball courts and ward precincts of Chicago, the birthplace of modern Democracy, a hard fought game sometimes involves a little trash talk, an occasional sharp elbow, or a mysteriously malfunctioning scoreboard. But this doesn't mean we always have to resort to flagrant fouls, or angrily shooting our opponent in the parking lot, just because he showboated after a layup. Let's all remember the lesson of Ron Artest -- charging into the stands and savagely beating a heckler might feel good at first, but in the end it just might mean losing that big shoe contract with Nike. And so I encourage both sides in this exciting contest to "keep it cool," and "play within yourself." Whether you are a "shirt" or a "skin," let's all respect the game. Are you a member of the Revolutionary Guards who just laid out a student demonstrator with a vicious, bone-jarring hit? Instead of taunting him, offer your hand to help him back to his feet. This will be a polite sign of mutual competitive respect before your next vicious, bone-jarring hit. Are you the student demonstrator? After collecting your teeth, congratulate the Guard on his his awesome hit. This will let the Guard know that you are a good sport, and committed to continue your dialogue without preconditions. At the end of the day, we need to leave our differences on the court and start focusing on the dangerous enemy who threatens all of us: Dick Cheney. Let's also remember a good sport is gracious in victory and defeat. If you find yourself way ahead, don't run up the body count just to impress the UN poll voters. Act like you've been there before! If you're on the losing side, don't try to prolong the inevitable with ticky-tack fouls and time-outs and Hail-Allah trick protest formations. You gave it your best shot, but the fat lady is beginning to sing. So let's cue up Queen on the stadium PA, pass out the commemorative t-shirts, and get ready to douse the winning mullahs with Gatorade. After the victory parades, I'd love to host the winners at the White House for some sort of ceremonial diplomatic photo-op. In the final tally, the only thing that matters in the diplomatic arena is sportsmanship. As we say here, "it's not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game." I am certain that the best team will prevail, because as we also say, "winners never cheat and cheaters never win." And in the words of Raiders legend Al Davis, "just win, baby." The most important thing is that you get this distracting sudden death shootout over with, because it's really screwing with my legislative agenda. Not to mention my sleep schedule. Until then, I would like to offer my sincere congratulations to the eventual winners, and best wishes in your upcoming playoff series with the Tel Aviv Fightin' Zionists. I've already programmed it on my TiVo![/rquoter]
basso, the grown-ups are finally in charge and most of us don't care if the third graders whose blogs you read can't understand why some people don't run willy-nilly into a busy street without looking.
basso, hasn't learned that the feel-good tough talk of the last administration allowed Iran to develop numerous centrifuges, and NK to develop several nuclear weapons. Those things happened under the kind of diplomacy that basso supported for 8 years, and is advocating now. Somehow he can't get past the idea that it feels good to act like a tough guy, but it isn't always the most effective way to accomplish useful goals.
Is there any explanation for basso always hiding his sources beyond those sources being completely embarrassing? ... (waits)
By the way, this thread title is an insult to one of the lesser known great books in American History...
Mousavi now links himself to Obama and basically slams Bush in the process. Poor basso. http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0609/Mousavi_is_the_Obama_of_Iran.html That's from Mousavi's external spokesman, talking to Foreign Policy: FP: Would Mousavi pursue a different foreign policy than Ahmadinejad? MM: As you may know, former President Mohammad Khatami, who is supporting Mousavi at the moment, was in favor of dialogue between the civilizations, but Ahmadinejad talks about the war of the civilizations. Is there not any difference between the two? We [Iranians] are a bit unfortunate. When we had our Obama [meaning President Khatami], that was the time of President Bush in the United States. Now that [the United States] has Obama, we have our Bush here [in Iran]. In order to resolve the problems between the two countries, we should have two Obamas on the two sides. It doesn't mean that everything depends on these two people, but this is one of the main factors.
