The NY Times’ Philip Gordon argued the other day that Trump should stay out of the Iran protests. Obama luminaries such as John Kerry, Ben Rhodes, Susan Rice, and Samantha Power have taken shots at Trump and/or said to stay out. The Washington Post’s Michael Singh recommends support for the protesters from Washington. And then there’s the Editorial Board: can you guess why they support Trump and what they want him to do? Let’s check in
The West should support the protesters in Iran
FIVE DAYS of street protests in cities across Iran have underlined the fundamental weakness of a regime sometimes portrayed in Washington as a regional juggernaut. Despite the lifting of most Western economic sanctions after 2015, the Islamic republic has been unable to satisfy the expectations of everyday Iranians, who see the country’s resources squandered on corruption and foreign military adventures by clerics who deny basic freedoms. Protests that began in one city over rising food prices quickly mushroomed into a nationwide uprising directed squarely at the rule of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
Wait, so the regime isn’t using all that cash they got from Obama and from the ending of many sanctions, especially those from European countries? I wonder what they could be using the money for.
The popular demand for change is justified and deserves international support. President Trump has been right to tweet his backing for the demonstrators; European leaders, who have been far more cautious, should speak up. At the same time, it’s important to mind the lessons of history, which suggest that the odds that the protesters will trigger a revolution are long. The Khamenei regime has proved ruthlessly adept at putting down previous opposition movements, most recently in 2009, and still has abundant repressive resources at its disposal.
Previously, the Iranian dictators knew that support wasn’t coming from the U.S., and Europe followed Obama’s hands-off policy. But, it’s good to see the WP taking a cue from Trump, and wanting to push Europe to support the protesters. And here we go
At the same time, Mr. Trump should avoid acts that would undercut the protests and empower the regime’s hard-liners. Foremost among these would be a renunciation of the 2015 nuclear accord. That would divide the United States from European governments when they should be coordinating their response to the uprising, and it would give the regime an external threat against which to rally. Reform of the nuclear accord can wait. Now is the time for Mr. Trump to focus on supporting the people of Iran.
Anything to support Obama’s terrible no-good Iran deal, eh? One which will allow Iran to restart their nuclear weapons program in less than 10 years.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
What, actually, could the President do, in deeds rather than just words?
The New Con Men want a war. They need a war just like in 2003. Why do Con Men love them some war? Several reasons: Wars (stimulus spending) boost the economy and importantly redistribute of taxpayer monies to defense contractors. Wars boost the popularity of presidents, at least in the short term. Con Men like the chest thumping associated with war.
When was the last time one of our invasions and occupations had lasting benefit?
And while in general we support rebellion, even violence, against autocrats, and the Iranian protests have turned violent, would tRump be so supportive of American protestors who stormed local police stations?
Ironically, the protestors are demanding an end to the fundamentalist theocracy controlling Iran, which is exactly what the far-right want to ENACT in the US!
President Obama is living rent-free in tRump’s hollow head. Plenty of room there.
Ever talk to your pulmonologist? You’re hyperventilating again.
Funny you should ask. In my professor days I taught respiratory physiology in a med school! Anyway, I have no symptoms of hyperventilating, but thanks for asking.
Sure you did, little guy, just like you “joined” the Army in 1971 — during the Vietnam war, ya know.