Skip to comments.Famous American Strategist Calls for Support of Iranian Students (by SMCCDI)
Posted on 01/24/2004 8:48:59 AM PST by William McKinley
One of the most famous American analysts called, yesterday, for the increase of official US support of the Iranian Student Movement and the Secularist forces who are seeking to overthrown the Islamic republic regime. Dr. Jack Wheeler, the mastermind behind the famous "Reagan Doctrine", who was speaking in a public forum in Dallas (TX/USA), stated: "More than ever we shall adjust our policy and bring a public and firm support to the brave students and freedom fighters who are fighting against a barbarian and terrorist regime". "Without doubt, these young Iranians who are forming more than 70% of Iran's population are our best friends for years to come and they're our natural allies against fanatism and terrorism" he emphasized.
Dr. Wheeler slammed those "Opportunistic European Countries" who are blinded by the money made on the back of the oppressed people of the World and predicted a soon end to their colonial rules. Following Dr. Wheeler's description of the current geopolicy, Aryo Pirouznia, speaking on behalf of SMCCDI, asked from the audience for an increase of Americans moral support for Iranian freedom fighters. Pirouznia stated:" Your moral support and pressure against those countries dealing with my Motherland is an important step in the Iranian Freedom process. Such help is less costly than any type of military war which will dammage my country and undermines the increasing US popularity among the majority of the Iranians." "Help us to determine our future by ourselves. Just support us moraly and we will overcome of a shacky regime" he emphasized.
Jack Wheeler who's a Geopolitic expert and a maverick explorer is well known for his role in support of the non-marxist freedom movements across the globe and his role in the dismantelment of the defunct Soviet Empire. He's the author of several books and is managing an online news service named "Tothepointnews.com"
While there is probably some disagreement around here on how much involvement the US should have in regime change in Iran, I don't think there is too much disagreement that it would be in our interests if the current regime in Iran was replaced with one more open to the ideals of liberty and freedom.
I tend to fall on the side that we should not be completely isolationist in this regard, and should help to some degree those fighting to bring about regime change. However, I tend to not like those who are supported by or supportive of Marxists or socialists. I see that as replacing one problem with another problem that is not necessarily better (and due to the turmoil during a revolution, probably worse).
It is for this kinship there seems to be with the TransNational Radical Party that I am starting to wonder about the SMCCDI, whose goals and alliances to date I had thought to be totally compatible with the goals of our country.
For example, here we see that the TRP has set up a complete section of their website just for the SMCCDI. You can see over on the right, the following ad:
Here is a complete photo gallery of the SMCCDI with the TRP. Here is an appeal from the TRP and SMCCDI, published on the SMCCDI's website. Here is a press release detailing some of the coordinating activities the TRP and its umbrella groups were taking with the SMCCDI.
RADICAL IRAN /: TOMORROW MANIFESTATION In front of the EMBASSY IRANIAN To ROMEHere's a story showing the involvement of some other leftist organizations:
In the light of the events that are having place in Iran, tomorrow 8 July 2003, Left Radical Transnational one, Radical Italiani and Radicaliroma will be present in front of the Embassy Iranian in order to ask the respect for the right of the students to manifest the following day, in all the Iran where day in memory of the tragic events of 1999 is previewed one. In that occasion, the manifestations of the students of Tehran, like in China of Tienanmen Public square in 1989, were repressed in the blood from the teocratico regimen Iranian, from the so-called "reformist government" of Khatami.
Against Hush of this Europe that once again chooses not opporsi to antiliberal governments, isolating and disarming the hopes of the young people Iranians, the radicals will manifest raising the faces of the killed students, and will deliver one letter to the ambassador sanctioned Iranian in order to remember the obligation from the Universal Declaration of the rights of the man.
They will be present:
MARK PANNELLA and MARK CAPPATO, European deputies,
SERGIO STANZANI, President of the PRT,
SERGIO Of ELIA, Secretary of Nobody Touches Caino
DANIEL CAPEZZONE, Secretary of Italian Radicals
NICOLE SADIGHI, journalist Iranian and exponent of the Student Movement Coordination Committee for Democracy in Iran (SMCCDI)
It was to an audiance composed of Italian officials, activists and journalists that, on Saturday, Mr. Kaveh Mohseni, the SMCCDI's Special Representative to the Cagliari (S. Italy) Conference, called for the support of the "Iran's Freedom Process" and its "Secularist forces" by Italy and its European partners of EU...That was not 100% correct though, as this Italian girl pointed out on her blog:
This meeting, coordinated by Ms. Stefania Lepanna and Mr. Michele Demontis, was organized by Italy's "Radicali Sardi" and the "TransNational Radical Party", and several Italian deputies from groups such as, the "Democratie-Socialisti", were among the supporters and speakers.
However,In the text that SMCCDI has published there is something incorrect:Love the smiley. Ahem.
The event in Italy has been organized by the "Transnational Radical Party" and Association "Radicali Sardi"
The "Socialisti Democratici Italiani" did not organize the event, they will be there as special participants.
It's very important to modify this piece of text..
So who exactly are the TransNational Radical Party? It's a bigger, more powerful leftist organization than you would expect for a group you have never heard of. Their website is here. Gandhian, socialist, "libertarian socialist" (which is also often known as "anarchist". Here's how they described themselves back in 1998.
In his political career, Mr. Pannella co-founded a series of organizations such as the League for divorce, the League for objection of conscience, the League for the abrogation of the Agreement between the Catholic Church and the Italian State (Concordato), the Centre of legal initiative Pietro Calamandrei, as well as the Italian Association for Demographic Education (AIED). He has been at the forefront of the promotion important reforms regarding narcotics, facing incarceration on various occasions for his civil disobediences. He played a prominent role in the pro-choice movement in Italy that led to the legalization of abortion in the early 1980s...I think this flirtation or marriage (depending on just how tight things are between them) is a tragic mistake on the part of the Iranian students.
Engaged in the defence of civil rights in Eastern European countries, in 1968, he was arrested in Sofia for having distributed leaflets against the Communist regime. He is one of the first promoters and founders of the Green and ecologist political movements in Europe....
Mr. Pannella was one of the first European Federalists and fought, through non-violent means, for the creation of the European Union...
He is honorary President of the Party of the Rom (ROI) in the Czech Republic and he is also honorary member of the Socialist Slovene Youth. The KKL, Karen Kalehm Le Israel dedicated him a reforestation area in the desert of Negev in Israel.
I'm seeing a complete website set up by the TRP for the SMCCDI.
I'm seeing joint press releases.
And I am seeing an entire photo gallery dedicated to the TRP and no other examples of any other group that just happened to attend a same conference as the SMCCDI getting similar treatment.
So yes, you are in my estimation missing something. Clearly, there is more kinship between these two organizations than they just happened to cross paths once.
The question I have is, how much kinship?
using each other to promote a common causeI think it is pretty important for us to determine just how common their cause is. Is it just to get rid of the anti-American, rights abusing, axis-of-evil theocratic regime? Or is it to install a pro-abortion, pro-drug, anti-religion (not just anti-theocracy), pro-socialist, radical government who would be just as much of a thorn in the side of the US as the current regime is (and, come to think of it, would unlikely bring freedom to the people of Iran-- far left governments never do).
These conferences are attended by the same groups all the time.Yes, predominantly very left wing groups.
If Amnesty Int'l or Reporters without Borders had "spots" on smccdi, would there be a problem with that? Or vice versa?Damn straight I would find it problematic.
I don't think it would necessarily mean that each support everything the other group says or does.True. But finding out exactly where the support begins and ends becomes very important.
We've got plenty of people who push the SMCCDI on here. Perhaps some are involved with them- they seem to get 'inside reports'. They should be able to contact someone who could make a statement.
It would be very interesting to see if they would be willing to distance themselves from the leftist goals of TRP.
And it will be very interesting if such a request is denied.
The revolution that took place and put the Islamic Republic Party in place was leftist in style and tactics, and was supported by the Iranian left. They may feel they ended up being betrayed, but any leftist movement or revolution leaves the people who supported it feeling betrayed- it is only a matter of if it happens right away or later.
It was students, as every American recalls, who took the hostages. The left was a major force in the universities of Iran, as is generally the case.
The Islamic Republic Party formed a government based on a form of Islam but with the typical leftist tight control over the economy by the state-- and without economic freedom there can be no real freedom.
The destabilization of the Shah's regime was accomplished with the street demonstrations, propaganda, and general strikes that the left always employs.
It would be incredible naivety for us to believe that the leaders of the SMCCDI have not thought about what their plans are, should they succeed. They have. They don't want to say. They need to if they want to get the support of people like me-- for if they are leftist they will end up under a form of repression just as bad as they live under now, but in getting there there would be many risks for American lives and wasted American dollars.
What is your proof for such an accusation? Although they represent a wide spectrum of political ideologies, they have been rather specific in their declarations of what they are seeking. See below.Yes, I already had read that. They have made clear not what government they want, but rather that they "trust the Iranian people to later decide as to which ideology or leader suits them best."
In other words, the link you provided does not answer my question, but rather it says "we aren't going to answer that; we'll let the people later answer it."
That is not good enough. Obviously, whenever a revolution occurs, the leaders of the revolution will have great sway with the people in getting what they want as the form and content of the governance.
Saying "set aside our political preferences" is another way of saying "trust us", and history has shown time and again that leftists cannot be trusted, even when their intentions are completely noble, because the ideology is hopelessly flawed.
There is a lot which is very good in the articles presented in that link. The devil can be in the details. For example,
Everyone who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for ones self and family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection, such as pension plans for government employees.This could mean something innocuous, or it could mean state mandated socialism. Taking it on faith that it won't be the latter would be foolhardy. Similarly
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay. Motherhood and childcare are entitled to special care and assistanceAgain I am seeing the foundation of state socialism.
Everyone is entitled to a universal medical coverage, with a major focus on preemptive medicine.And again.
Everyone has the right to education... Free education shall be provided from elementary until the completion of a masters program. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available.More free stuff! Everything is free! Isn't that why they call it freedom?
After seven years and subject to the specific educational facilitys discretion, high school and above teachers/professors have to be given lifetime employment, without fear of dismissal for any reason.Oh yeah! Let's give the universities to people and give them total freedom from responsibility! Imagine the state run education system in the hands of lifetime appointed full-fledged Marxists. No, there is no risk of that! And no risk of the education system turning into a propaganda factory and brainwashing apparatus.
And so forth throughout.
No wonder they want us to "set aside our political preferences and unite in establishing these rights". I'd love to go to my foes and say "let's not fight. Let's instead unite in establishing everything I believe in as a starting point."
You aren't dispelling my fears. You are magnifying them. I fear you are desiring to send the people of Iran from the hell of a state run theocracy to the hell of a state run socialist meatgrinder.
The people of Iran will need to decide. But after a revolution there is a vaccuum, and we need to know who is going to step into that vaccuum. The leaders of a revolution will be part of that. Knowing their goals and their political inclination beyond just wanting change is a must.
Let me share with you some interesting words.
Mass-popular organisations and trade unions, should by their very nature remain above ideology. They unite people on basis of their immediate and direct democratic demands. They should combine over what unites them - trade, profession, gender, ethnicity, sexuality - rather than what divides them - ideology. Political groupings need to operate within these structures, formulating demands and arguing for changes in policy and direction, all within the framework of the raison d'etre of the mass organisation. Ideological issues, whether political, religious or cultural, must be kept out unless it has direct bearing on the purpose of the association.What does that mean? Does that seem to fit what you see? What the modus operandi here is?
It is from a Marxist critique of the failure of the Iranian Revolution of the late 1970s. From the same critique:
The struggle for a non-ideological state is inseparable from that for socialism.I can't speak for anyone else here. But until I see the SMCCDI explicitly denounce socialism as incompatible with freedom, and while I continue to see in their declared goals many of the goals of the international socialists, and while I see them making join declarations and presentations with the TRP, I not only will not be supporting them, I will be actively spreading the word that they deserve ambivalence at best from American conservatives.
When I first started reading your posts I thought you might have discovered something new and important. If you had found proof of some kind of insidious conspiracy I would be would be ever so thankful.I always try to be helpful. And you are more than welcome to try and be dismissive of me and my concerns. It is always an option.
But pardon me if I pull the string on some of my concerns. Even if I am a bit of a moral absolutist, in as far as I grasp how devastating far-left governments are to the people under them. I hate theocracies, and I hate repressive regimes. I also hate leftist regimes, and do not see them as being measurable better than theocracies.
I was on board with your efforts when it seemed to me that those behind the scenes (such as the person, Aryo Pirouznia, who set up the SMCCDI website were people who were supportive of Reza Pahlavi. And I fully appreciate the need to find support (and resources) whereever possible. But there is a rule of thumb, which is that any organization which is not expressly right wing eventually becomes or is taken over by left wing interests (if they weren't that way from the start).
And despite your dismissive attitude towards me, that is a legitimate concern especially when I am seeing joint declarations (hosted on the SMCCDI website) and joint initiatives (hosted on the TRP website) and photo galleries of meetings (when none are made of similar meetings with non-leftist groups). How deep is the involvement? Obviously, Nicole Sadighi -- a spokeswoman of the SMCCDI-- is deeply involved ("Nicole Sadighi is also a member of our Transnational Radical Party"-- Stefania Lepanna).
DoctorZIn, I came with questions and concerns, and you are cementing my concerns with your lack of concern over these matters.
If the main goal has always been to further democracy while defeating the terrorists, in line with the Bush administration's goal... wouldn't it also be true that when it comes time to rebuild a nation after its revolution, the US would be there to help? Prior to the uprising of the Islamic republic, didn't the US and Iran enjoy many years of common goals and mutual agreement? Won't it be possible to return to such cooperation, in peace?
I think of socialist Europe, and realize that the EU is not reaching out with open arms to the Iranian people, but instead props up the regime. In the war in Iraq, we have support from former Eastern Bloc nations that recognize the dangers of communism, Poland chief among them. In the aftermath of revolution in Iran, wouldn't those that recognize the evils of communism rally around the Iranian people as they begin to form their government?
In gathering support for freedom in Iran, the people are desperate for resources. If we do not stand up to help them, and show them the power of a republican form of government, then we have failed. Leaving them to the leftists is not an answer. Railing against the evils of socialism will not show the people the danger. Their movement is so young and so weak, why dash their hopes before they have even begun to fight?
The media and leftist movements in America appear to ignore Iran. If a socialist agenda could gather strength, wouldn't we hear more about it in the press? Why is it that the regime's greatest ally, the socialists in Europe, cannot keep the puppets in power? They cannot protect them from themselves.
This is all much ado about nothing, unless revolution comes. And with the boot of the mullahs on the necks of the people, I do not see revolution on the horizon. And that is the tragedy, not the concern over the specter of socialism in the future.
I am equally convinced, some are radical leftist. Sadaghi's involvement is enough to make that apparent.
Understanding how much sway each faction has is important. One of the reasons that Iran is in the mess it is now is that in the late 70s, groups bought into change without having a true understanding of who would be empowered by the change.
Perhaps some think a crapshoot is a good idea-- hey, let's roll the dice. It can't end up worse than we have now, can it? Get rid of the theocracy, and let's take our chances.
My answer is, it most certainly can end up worse than we have now. You see, a far left regime would be just as tragic for the Iranian people, but would be harder to remove because instead of being the focus of the left-controlled humanitarian groups like Amnesty International, they would get only cursory attention from those groups. They would have the support of far-left groups worldwide, they would have apologetics in the United States media preventing any groundswell of support.
In other words, pretty much there is one shot here once the regime is deposed for the Iranian people for several decades. If the far left, such as those of the same mindset as the TRP, win the day, the opportunity for freedom for the Iranian people will be gone for an entire generation.
Unfortunatley, that is not the case.
The TRP is not involved out of the goodness of their hearts. They aren't just voicing some support because they give a damn about the people of Iran. They are doing so because they believe it advances their strategic and political interests. They obviously feel that they will be well positioned when the revolution comes.
The cavalier attitude being shown to me regarding their influence is not comforting.
And yes, you are correct that the history of revolutions shows that they most often succeed at toppling the regime when all opposition groups unite. But the history of revolutions also shows that more times than not, the people do not end up in any better of a situation, and the history of revolutions in modern times shows that quite often, it is because the far left grabs power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.