This piece was posted yesterday (1/21/14) on Huffington Post:
The Iran Nuclear Accord Is Good for Human Rights
Akbar Ganji is an Iranian journalist often
referred to as Iran's "pre-eminent political dissident" after spending 6
years in jail for his human rights activities.
The
nuclear agreement between Iran and the P5+1 has provoked considerable
debate. The proponents of diplomatic resolution of the standoff with
Iran have praised the accord. Its opponents, such as Israel and Saudi
Arabia, have harshly criticized it. As a former Iranian political
prisoner who spent six years in the Islamic Republic's jails and whose
writings have been banned in Iran, I support the Geneva agreement. The
question is, what is the goal of continuing the standoff with Iran, if
not reaching an agreement with it?
If
the goal is regime change in Iran, we must recall that 13 years of
backbreaking sanctions did not topple Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq;
the military invasion of 2003 did. The sanctions did kill at least half a
million Iraqi children, and prompted the infamous statement by
Madeleine Albright, President Bill Clinton's secretary of state, that
getting rid of Saddam Hussein was worth the huge cost in terms of human
suffering in Iraq.
If
the Iranian regime's respect for human rights is made the necessary
condition for a nuclear accord, there will be no agreement at all,
because it will prove the claim by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
that the real goal of the United State is regime change, and that the
nuclear program and claims about Iran wanting to "wipe Israel off the
map" are only excuses. So long as there is an external threat that
endangers its survival, no regime will agree to reform itself and become
democratic.
National
security and economic prosperity are prerequisites for the emergence of
a democratic regime. Destroying the infrastructure of a nation through
harsh economic sanctions and war will not bring about a transition to
democracy. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria are prime examples of the
failure of such thinking. In the first 11 months of 2013 alone, more
than 8,000 people were killed in Iraq as a result of terrorism. Libya
has been transformed into a lawless country controlled by various
militia, with some having separatist tendencies. Syria has been
completely destroyed, with an estimated 120,000 people killed. It has
also become an operation center for some of the most extreme terrorist
groups. In fact, as a result of the regime-change crusade of the past 12
years, jihadi groups of the Middle East have become stronger, not
weaker.
A
prosperous middle class is the agent for transition to democracy.
Crippling economic sanctions only add millions of middle-class people to
the ranks of the poor, denying the democratic movement of its most
potent element. Under such conditions, everyone only struggles for
survival, moral standards and trust decline, and democracy and human
rights will be viewed as unaffordable luxury. Such conditions will kill
and injure hundreds of thousands of people, and strengthen terrorism.
As
an undemocratic regime, the Islamic Republic undoubtedly oppresses its
people. The goal of the Iranian democratic forces is transitioning to a
state committed to freedom and respect for human rights. Toward this
goal, defenders of human rights and democratic forces cannot, and must
not, ask Western powers to preserve or increase the current economic
sanctions that are punishing only the common Iranian people, blocking
the path to a nuclear accord and, hence, transforming Iran into another
Iraq or Syria. The main issue in Iran is democracy and the elimination
of all types of discrimination. Successful models for achieving such
goals, as happened in South Africa, Brazil, Chile and Argentina, to name
but a few, must be contrasted with a model based on crippling economic
sanctions and even military action.
Step-by-step
nuclear accords, the lifting of economic sanctions and the improvement
of the relations between Iran and Western powers will gradually remove
the warlike and securitized environment from Iran, save the people from
their current harsh lives and strengthen the middle class. In fact, if
there are friendly relations between Iran and Western powers, led by the
United States, the West will be able to exert more positive influence
on Iran to improve its state of human rights. Economic incentives,
investment in Iran's oil industry, export of new technology and other
encouragements are attractive enough to help open up the political
system and improve human rights.
The
release of all the political prisoners; freedom of the press, political
parties and civic-society organizations; respect for human and
citizens' rights; neutrality of the state with respect to religion;
institutional separation of the state and religion; and the abolishment
of capital punishment are the goals of all the Iranian democrats. But
they can be achieved by the Iranian people themselves through nonviolent
means, not with outside intervention and violence. Many Iranian
intellectuals and academics and even Iran's political prisoners, both
inside and outside Iran, advocate such a path. Western powers and
international human rights organizations are morally obligated to
condemn violations of human rights, but conditioning a nuclear accord
with Iran on improving human rights will only destroy any prospect for
the accord, and lead to war. Achieving respect for human rights and
transitioning to democracy is possible only in a peaceful framework, not
by constantly threatening the survival of the regime.
Releasing
all the political prisoners, freedom of the press, political parties
and civic-society organizations, respect for human and citizens' rights,
neutrality of the state with respect to religion, institutional
separation of the state and religion, and abolishing capital punishment
are the goals of all the Iranian democrats. But, they can be achieved by
the Iranian people themselves through non-violent means, not with
outside intervention and violence. Many Iranian intellectuals and
academics and even Iran's political prisoners, both inside and outside Iran,
advocate such a path. Western powers and international human rights
organizations are morally obligated to condemn violations of human
rights, but conditioning a nuclear accord with Iran on improving human
rights will only destroy any prospect for the accord, and lead to war.
Achieving respect for human rights and transition to democracy is
possible only in a peaceful framework, not through constantly
threatening the regime for its survival.
No comments:
Post a Comment