November 16, 2003
Does the U.S. really want democracy in the ME? Majid Mohamadi
Long-term commitment to transforming the Middle East and making democracy have never been a pillar of U.S. foreign policy and it is hard to believe that it will be. The U.S. administrations basically do not want democracy
- any reading of it -in the Middle East. There is a huge gap between the rhetoric of democratization and the reality of the United States' actual
policy. The reasons are:
1. The U.S. administrations have been very comfortable living with full or partial autocracies in one form or the other in the region for a long time. They want to deal with one "big" guy or family in every state in the region. They do not want to get involved in working with
democracies due to their complexities in domestic and foreign policies. Do they really want another E.U. when dealing with the U.N. or other international institutions?
2. Democracies are not usually interested in long-term conflicts - other than the U.S.- when they are not directly attacked. How will the U.S. benefit from peace while military production for internal and external needs is one of the most profitable areas for American companies?
3. Supporting democracies is based on understanding and dialogue. The U.S. administrations usually talk the language of power not the language of mutual understanding even with the allies.
4. Local democracies are usually related to international trade. The largest Middle Eastern state, Iran, which has made the greatest genuine strides towards representative government is also under the greatest burden of US trade sanctions (and now Syria). Sanctions have a high correlation with the sanctioned state's policy toward Israel: more enmity toward Israel, more sanctions.
5. Have anyone heard about encompassing and well-funded U.S projects and programs in the area of economics, education and civil society in the region?. Have anyone heard about anything like this in Iran? But we have heard thousands of words and lip services from the U.S. officials about promotion of democracy in Iran. USAID, the National Endowment for Democracy, Middle East Partnership Initiative and the like have usually other intentions, causes and functions than democratization.
6. Is it possible to promote democracy by overthrowing democrats (like coup against Mossadeq)? The U.S. administrations have usually capitulated any democratic movement in the region and radicalized them. Maybe they are seeking the paradox of "democracy without any democratic movement," put aside "democracy without democrats." The U.S. administrations consciously know that every democratic movement in the region would not be pro-U.S. Supporting democratic movements has never been the declared U.S. policy in the region. The U.S. wants clients and not colleagues.
7. If there really were free democracies in the Middle East, the unpopularity of the United States would likely have guaranteed that Washington would never have had any bases or support in the region.
8. The very low credibility of the US in the M.E is an important obstacle for real engagement in democratization from abroad. Even elites and modern strata like technocrats and university scholars and students cannot trust the U.S. administrations.
9. Developing democracy would be very effective through educating people to the real notions of democracy. Have anyone heard about the U.S. support for education in the region? Has the U.S. done anything about the millions of children that have no access to education or depend on the Islamic madrasas for receiving part of their daily nutritional needs?
10. The U.S. administration is not ready to push the democratization process in the region because it knows this could empower the Islamists.
11. No body in the administration talks about constitutional and judicial reforms with resort to civil society institutions but they talk about women's right or liberalization with resort to a mass society approach. Gradual democratization is impossible without constitutional and judicial reform.
12. The U.S. administrations have no idea about the kind of democracy that would fit in the region. Would it be " direct democracy", "guided democracy", "liberal democracy", "religious democracy", etc?
13. They want to sell this idea to the U.S. public that Israel is the only democratic state in the region and this justifies one-sided policy of the U.S. in blinded support for Israel. The non-democratic ME provide a handful of cases for this policy in the West. This is an essential part of the neocons' presentational strategy which tries to
reshape the Middle East in line with Israel's perceived ideological and material needs.
Majid Mohammadi
http://news.gooya.com/english/archives/001816.php October 30, 2003
Uranium enrichment or violation of Iranian rights on a daily basis?
Majid Mohamadi
Which issue is more important for Iranian people: uranium enrichment or violation of their rights on a daily basis?
Iran's government agreed, after months of resistance, to accept stricter international inspections of its nuclear sites and to suspend production of enriched uranium.
This is what the U.S and Europeans asked for in favor of their national interests. Now it is time for another pressure on Iranian government that “benefits” Iranian people, i.e. "human rights inspections". Iran's government has shown that only surrenders to the pressure of superior international actors. Khamene`i and authoritarian faction understand the language of power. If the U.S. and Europeans use their power in favor of improving human rights in Iran, the government will agree, again after months or years of resistance, to accept stricter international inspections of its prisons, courts and other judicial and security facilities, and to suspend use of torture of political activists and stoning the women or amputation. Iranian government must sign, ratify and carry out an additional agreement under the universal declaration of Human Rights that would allow surprise inspections of its judicial and security installations.
The international terms for compliance should include unfettered access by officials of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) — the United Nations body that monitors violations of human rights around the world and undertakes preventive human rights action — to interrogation sites and jails, as well as observing places where political activists and intellectuals are tortured.
Iran's government should also commit itself to answer probing questions posed by human rights organizations about the recent violations of human rights especially in the trials of journalists and political activists, killing of Zahra Kazemi, serial killings of intellectuals and attack of paramilitary forces to the dorms in Allaameh-e Tabaatabaa`i, Tehran and Tabriz universities.
As Europeans urged Iran to adopt a protocol to the nonproliferation treaty that provides for intrusive inspections on short notice, and to halt its uranium enrichment program, they must urge her to fully comply with international regulations and treaties regarding human rights, stop serious violations of human rights, promote ratification and implementation of international standards, and promote the establishment of national human rights infrastructures. I hope there will also be unusual visit by European foreign ministers, together, for the sake of human rights.
http://news.gooya.com/english/archives/001145.php