The sweeping tide of anti-government protests rippling through the Middle East and North Africa has begun to stir up protests in Iran and for the second time in two years, protesters are posing a serious threat to the Islamic regime.
While much attention is currently centered upon Gaddafi and Libya, Iran and the Islamic regime, which has had significant degrees of instability in the last several years, does seem ripe for a regime change.
Over 70 percent of the population sits below the age of 30, and with ever rising unemployment rates and the inflation rates currently at 13.5 percent, the prospects for an overthrow have never appeared as probable.
During the post-presidential riots of 2009, opposition leaders took to the streets to protest the re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a vote that was largely seen as fraudulent, in the largest set of riots since Islamic Revolution of 1979.
In Washington, where Iran has been a major focus of foreign policy for decades, the prospect of a major leadership shift offers a welcomed opportunity.
“Iran behind al-Qaeda was the second most discussed topic that we had during my time in government,” said the former director of the CIA and the National Security Agency (NSA), General Michael Hayden, on his discussions with former President George W. Bush.
Gen. Hayden, and Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Peter Pace, Former Under Secretary if Defense for Policy, Walter Slocomb, and several other former military and government officials attended a forum over the weekend titled “Middle East in Transition: Prospects for Iran?” The forum highlighted Iran and the prospects for regime change and complexities associated with diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Iran.
Iran’s leadership has consistently voiced strong language towards the United States and Israel, a major U.S. ally in the Middle East.
The regime’s nuclear program has consistently been scrutinized by the United Nations, and several series of sanctions aimed at shrinking the prospects of nuclear weapons capabilities have made the economic environment in Iran that much more severe for its leadership.
“I don’t know of any country that has caused us more heartburn, more anguish over a longer period of time than Iran,” said Lee Hamilton, former chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, member of the president’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and the president’s Homeland Security Advisory Council.
While much attention is currently centered upon Gaddafi and Libya, Iran and the Islamic regime, which has had significant degrees of instability in the last several years, does seem ripe for a regime change.
Over 70 percent of the population sits below the age of 30, and with ever rising unemployment rates and the inflation rates currently at 13.5 percent, the prospects for an overthrow have never appeared as probable.
During the post-presidential riots of 2009, opposition leaders took to the streets to protest the re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a vote that was largely seen as fraudulent, in the largest set of riots since Islamic Revolution of 1979.
In Washington, where Iran has been a major focus of foreign policy for decades, the prospect of a major leadership shift offers a welcomed opportunity.
“Iran behind al-Qaeda was the second most discussed topic that we had during my time in government,” said the former director of the CIA and the National Security Agency (NSA), General Michael Hayden, on his discussions with former President George W. Bush.
Gen. Hayden, and Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Peter Pace, Former Under Secretary if Defense for Policy, Walter Slocomb, and several other former military and government officials attended a forum over the weekend titled “Middle East in Transition: Prospects for Iran?” The forum highlighted Iran and the prospects for regime change and complexities associated with diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Iran.
Iran’s leadership has consistently voiced strong language towards the United States and Israel, a major U.S. ally in the Middle East.
The regime’s nuclear program has consistently been scrutinized by the United Nations, and several series of sanctions aimed at shrinking the prospects of nuclear weapons capabilities have made the economic environment in Iran that much more severe for its leadership.
“I don’t know of any country that has caused us more heartburn, more anguish over a longer period of time than Iran,” said Lee Hamilton, former chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, member of the president’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and the president’s Homeland Security Advisory Council.
Hamilton called Iran’s political system “complex” and “volatile,” noting that it has over 200 separate parties.
The United States has made it clear that the current Iranian regime is a threat with the potential development of nuclear weapons being the major concern.
“Militant Islamism threatens to destroy civilization as we know it,” said Michael Mukasey, former U.S. attorney general (2007¬–2009).
“This regime is incapable of abandoning its nuclear weapons ambitions voluntarily, something has to change inside Iran for their policies and their practices with respect to nuclear weapons to change,” said former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Walter Slocombe.
Next: Maneuvering Regime Change
The United States has made it clear that the current Iranian regime is a threat with the potential development of nuclear weapons being the major concern.
“Militant Islamism threatens to destroy civilization as we know it,” said Michael Mukasey, former U.S. attorney general (2007¬–2009).
“This regime is incapable of abandoning its nuclear weapons ambitions voluntarily, something has to change inside Iran for their policies and their practices with respect to nuclear weapons to change,” said former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Walter Slocombe.
Next: Maneuvering Regime Change
Maneuvering Regime Change
A change in Iran is in the best interest of the United States, yet the U.S. government sits between a rock and a hard place.
“U.S. military for one is quite capable of handling any new threat” in the region, said former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs (2005–2007) General Pace, listing the United States’ extensive military capacity. However, having to use “brute force” would be “ugly,” he noted.
Slocombe echoed the notion, saying that “the military option to stop [Iran] is immensely unattractive” and that a strike would “do considerable damage but it won’t solve the problem and it has the potential to make the problem worse.”
According to Slocombe, the U.S. government should do everything that it can to promote internal change “while bearing in mind that it cannot be an American project.”
Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and former Congressman Bill Richardson, asked that Iranians engage in becoming connected in the ways that proved successful for Tunisians and Egyptians. He emphasized social media through Facebook and the Internet and to reach out and “connect with your families, with anybody you know in Iran and the Middle East and spread the word of democracy.”
Many opposition groups have made attempts to overthrow the current Iranian regime; one group that has held long standing opposition is the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organizaiton (MEK or MKO), also synonymously called the People’s Mojahedin of Iran (PMOI).
MEK received support from Saddam Hussein and assisted Saddam in suppressing the opposition in Iraq while carrying out the internal security for Iraq.
Despite the MEK’s opposition to the current Islamic regime, the U.S. position on the MEK has been a rising dilemma. The MEK currently sits on the U.S. State Department' list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, yet many high-level officials have emphasized the MEK’s removal from the list.
“The MEK was placed on a terrorist list as a strategy of appeasement towards Teheran,” said Torchelli, “which makes a mockery of the terrorist list itself,” he said pointing out that the Taliban and North Koreans are not on the terrorist list while the MEK, which is largely unarmed and has cooperated with the United States, is.
According to Ambassador Dailey, it is an embarrassment that the United States and the current Iranian regime appear to be “of equal mind and on the same team of retaining the PMOI on the terrorist list.”
General Shelton noted that though “the MEK is not a perfect organization, they’ve made mistakes,” but so has the United States and that “our friends, our European allies along with our great partner, England, [has] taken them off the [terrorist] list.”
“I have not found the reason that convinces me,” for keeping MEK on the terrorist list, said Pace, but added that “I also know, however, like everybody else up here, that you don’t know everything. There’s always something you don’t know.”
“We must support those people in Iran who seek freedom and democracy and respect for human rights,” said Lee Hamilton, adding that the best way to move forward in its relationship with Iran is for the United States to support the opposition. Among those ways, he listed “cash,” helping the opposition acquire the latest technology for “getting the word out throughout the country,” and that “we should never let up on our support for human rights.”
“U.S. military for one is quite capable of handling any new threat” in the region, said former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs (2005–2007) General Pace, listing the United States’ extensive military capacity. However, having to use “brute force” would be “ugly,” he noted.
Slocombe echoed the notion, saying that “the military option to stop [Iran] is immensely unattractive” and that a strike would “do considerable damage but it won’t solve the problem and it has the potential to make the problem worse.”
According to Slocombe, the U.S. government should do everything that it can to promote internal change “while bearing in mind that it cannot be an American project.”
Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and former Congressman Bill Richardson, asked that Iranians engage in becoming connected in the ways that proved successful for Tunisians and Egyptians. He emphasized social media through Facebook and the Internet and to reach out and “connect with your families, with anybody you know in Iran and the Middle East and spread the word of democracy.”
Opposition to current regime
Many opposition groups have made attempts to overthrow the current Iranian regime; one group that has held long standing opposition is the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organizaiton (MEK or MKO), also synonymously called the People’s Mojahedin of Iran (PMOI).
MEK received support from Saddam Hussein and assisted Saddam in suppressing the opposition in Iraq while carrying out the internal security for Iraq.
Despite the MEK’s opposition to the current Islamic regime, the U.S. position on the MEK has been a rising dilemma. The MEK currently sits on the U.S. State Department' list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, yet many high-level officials have emphasized the MEK’s removal from the list.
“The MEK was placed on a terrorist list as a strategy of appeasement towards Teheran,” said Torchelli, “which makes a mockery of the terrorist list itself,” he said pointing out that the Taliban and North Koreans are not on the terrorist list while the MEK, which is largely unarmed and has cooperated with the United States, is.
According to Ambassador Dailey, it is an embarrassment that the United States and the current Iranian regime appear to be “of equal mind and on the same team of retaining the PMOI on the terrorist list.”
General Shelton noted that though “the MEK is not a perfect organization, they’ve made mistakes,” but so has the United States and that “our friends, our European allies along with our great partner, England, [has] taken them off the [terrorist] list.”
“I have not found the reason that convinces me,” for keeping MEK on the terrorist list, said Pace, but added that “I also know, however, like everybody else up here, that you don’t know everything. There’s always something you don’t know.”
“We must support those people in Iran who seek freedom and democracy and respect for human rights,” said Lee Hamilton, adding that the best way to move forward in its relationship with Iran is for the United States to support the opposition. Among those ways, he listed “cash,” helping the opposition acquire the latest technology for “getting the word out throughout the country,” and that “we should never let up on our support for human rights.”
