The outcome of Iran’s June 12 presidential election, which secured incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s position for another 4-year term, stirred up widespread controversy around the world and drew numerous condemnations, from German Chancellor Angela Merkel to the Muslim Canadian Congress.
Yet there are several progressive analysts and former state officials in the E.U. and U.S. who have dared to jeopardize their public standing by explicitly taking the side of the Iranian government, and denouncing foreign intervention in Iran’s internal affairs and covert efforts to topple the Islamic Republic establishment.
Paul Craig Roberts is among the prominent progressive pundits who have taken such a stand. An economist who served under President Ronald Reagan as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, Roberts has been honored with the title of the “Father of Reaganomics”.
Roberts has long been absent from the pages of the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the other mainstream corporate media, preferring instead to be an independent voice of political non-alignment.
These days, you find him writing for Counterpunch.org, VDare.com, LewRockwell.com, and American Free Press, among others, and though his articles might not find much of a place in the mainstream media, his work is widely known and circulated worldwide.
“The charge that the Iranian election was stolen is propagandistic,” he told me in an exclusive interview for Foreign Policy Journal. “Iran is under attack because it is one of two remaining independent countries in the region. If Iran also falls under U.S. hegemony, it is the end of Syria’s independence and of Hamas and Hezbollah.”
In my extensive discussion with Paul Craig Roberts, he insisted that there is “hard evidence” of U.S. efforts to carry on a color revolution in Iran.
Your recent articles on the post-election unrest have been frequently translated and widely circulated in the Persian-language media outlets in Iran.
Based on your evidence, conservative pundits claimed that Mir-Hossein Mousavi was a close associate of the American initiatives and the democratization institutes, particularly the National Endowment for Democracy, raising the funds of his campaign through their financial assistance. Have you been informed of any hard proof for this possible linkage, or is this only suspicion or possibility?
The question my several columns addressed is U.S. participation in the protests following the recent Iranian election. There is hard evidence that the U.S. government had a hand in the protests.
For example, neoconservative Kenneth Timmerman heads the Foundation for Democracy, which describes itself as “a private, non-profit organization established in 1995 with grants from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to promote democracy and internationally-recognized standards of human rights in Iran.” From various NED promoted “color revolutions”, as in Georgia and Ukraine, we know what that means.
Writing on June 11 prior to the Iranian election, Timmerman reported, “there’s talk of a green revolution in Tehran.” In other words, something had been prepared prior to the vote, which raises flags about the spontaneity of the protests. Timmerman continued: “The National Endowment for Democracy has spent millions of dollars during the past decade promoting ‘color’ revolutions in places such as Ukraine and Serbia, training political workers in modern communications and organizational techniques. Some of that money appears to have made it into the hands of pro-Mousavi groups, who have ties to non-governmental organizations outside Iran that the National Endowment for Democracy funds.”
There are also numerous reports, such as the ones cited in my columns, that President George W. Bush signed an order in May 2007 for the CIA to mount a covert “black” propaganda and disinformation operation to destabilize and eventually topple the Iranian political regime. There are also a number of published reports that the U.S. government funds terrorist organizations within Iran that carry out assassinations and bombings. I have no inside information as to how the destabilization plan was implemented or whether Mousavi had any direct links to the PSYOPS activities.
Timmerman, who should know as he is involved in the business, says NED money intended to promote a “color revolution” reached pro-Mousavi groups. Under America’s terrorism laws, this would make Mousavi guilty, and then there is the duck test. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, the chances are high that it is a duck. Mousavi declared his victory while people were still voting, according to some accounts, or before the votes were counted, according to other accounts. The purpose of such a premature announcement is to produce an uproar in the event of a different outcome. Other obvious elements of orchestration are apparent. They suggest that groundwork was laid for protests and that the protests were not entirely spontaneous.
According to a Washington Post report in 2007, then-President Bush was granted the authorization to spend some $400 million for activities ranging from espionage on Iran’s nuclear program to “supporting rebel groups opposed to the country’s ruling clerics”. While Mir-Hossein Mousavi had been an Iranian governmental insider, having served 8 year as a prime minister with close ties to some of the high-ranking clerics, could it be possible that his fans or his campaign associates might be ranked among the rebels who seek to topple the government?
This question could only be answered by those involved in the destabilization plan. My opinion, based on what I understand at this time, is that there are Iranian youth, especially in Tehran, who are secularized and westernized and who find the Islamic moral code oppressive. I don’t know where these youth got the idea that Mousavi, “the Butcher of Beirut”, would lift the burden of this code from their personal lives; nevertheless, it appears that the backbone of the protests in terms of numbers in the streets was the group of disaffected youths.
As for Mousavi and his powerful allies, such as Rafsanjani and Montazeri, I do not believe that their intention is to topple the government. These are ambitious and frustrated men who had lost out and wish to get back in the game. Making an issue of the elections was a way to do that.
Moreover, these are men accused of corruption by Ahmadinejad. They would not want an uncontested government in place that might act against them on corruption charges. It is certainly possible that the CIA and the NED-funded-Iranians knew enough of the splits, ambitions, and animosities among the ruling class to exploit them. I don’t think there was a danger that the protests would topple the government. However, the protests have served the U.S. purpose of further discrediting and isolating the Iranian government, setting up Iran for more pressure or more sanctions or even a military attack.
There have been extensive and contradictory reports of foreign intervention in Iran’s post-election turmoil. The majority of Western leaders condemned the crackdowns, having previously expressed their outrage at the results and alleged irregularities. A question arises here, and that is on the reasons for Western leaders’ silence and apathy about the deteriorating process of democracy in the neighboring monarchies and semi-tyrannies; Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, etc. If they really care about democracy, why don’t they take steps to democratize these autocracies?
The charge that the Iranian election was stolen is propagandistic. Iran is under attack because it is one of two remaining independent countries in the region. If Iran also falls under U.S. hegemony, it is the end of Syria’s independence and of Hamas and Hezbollah. The campaign against Iran has nothing to do with the state of Iranian democracy or elections and the campaign has little to do with nuclear energy or weapons. The allegation of an Iranian nuclear weapon is the fear factor equivalent to Saddam Hussein’s “weapons of mass destruction”. What the U.S. cannot tolerate is Iran’s existence as an independent country.
Did the U.S. corporate and mainstream media organize structural and pre-planned efforts to sow the seeds of uncertainty and ambiguity about the results of Iran’s presidential elections during the campaign season and even before the election took place?
The U.S. media’s demonization of Ahmadinejad during his first term created the foundation for the propagandistic charge that Ahmadinejad stole his reelection. Everything that Ahmadinejad did, said, and did not say was used to demonize him in the Western media.
For example, the false charge that Ahmadinejad wants to “wipe Israel off the map” is based on an incorrect translation that many language experts have exposed. Yet, the entire western media continues to report every time Ahmadinejad is mentioned that he wants to wipe Israel off the map.
In the years preceding the recent Iranian election, Ahmadinejad was portrayed as an embarrassment and an oppressor whom Iranians would remove in the next election.
What’s your idea on the prospects for Iran’s relations with the West under the shadows of the current row? Should Iran pursue a confrontational and antagonistic foreign policy in order to avoid becoming a “U.S. puppet” and an “E.U. stooge” in the eyes of global public opinion?
It is not Iran that is pursuing a confrontational foreign policy. It is the U.S. government. The U.S. government is antagonistic to the 30-year old Islamic government in Iran because it overthrew the U.S. puppet government in Iran. The U.S. government hides its antagonism behind moral veils such as “women’s rights”, “democracy”, “human rights”, and so forth, but the real intention is to bring Iran to heel. Whether Iran remains independent might depend on how Russia and China view the American threat to themselves.
Inarguably, one of the main reasons the Western media outlets and political leaders dislike Ahmadinejad is his steadfast stance on the nuclear program. According to the new International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief, there hasn’t been any categorical evidence for Iran’s atomic deviation, and U.S. statesmen haven’t shown any proof either. Given the forceful remarks of President Obama, who has expressed his commitment to preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons technology, should we expect the continuance of belligerence and hostility between the two governments in the coming years?
The nuclear weapon issue is a pretext for Washington, not a real issue. It is merely a way to paint Iran as a threat. If Iran were to develop a weapon, it could not be used against Israel without destroying the Palestinians as well, and perhaps Hezbollah in southern Lebanon and areas of Syria.
As a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty, Iran is permitted a nuclear energy program. The IAEA inspections, to which Iran submits, are designed to detect any diversion to a weapons program. The U.S. government should stop making false charges against the Iranian government. If the IAEA finds evidence of a weapons program, then it would be appropriate for the U.S. to lead in imposing sanctions. Instead, the U.S. government has put the cart before the horse, imposing sanctions and threatening military attack prior to any evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapons program.
The unanimous NIE [National Intelligence Estimate] report concluded that Iran had abandoned its weapons program 5 years ago. As for Ahmadinejad, he lacks the authority to decide for or against a nuclear program, whether energy or weapons. Ahmadinejad is not the leader of Iran. He is essentially an administrator and a spokesman, a chief operating officer.
Loading ...
Mr. Roberts appears to be very uneducated when it comes to Iran. He thinks that Iranians came to streets to fight against Islamic rules. That is not true. The main reason people showed up is because of the significant fraud in the election. I understand that not knowing the language (Farsi) and the culture make it difficult for non-Iranians to understand the situation. Mr. Roberts seems to have the same issues. He gives Ahmadinejad supporters a reason to justify the use of violence against people . They should appreciate it.
Farid, Roberts stated reason for the protests is not mutually exclusive from yours. Mr. Roberts said, “there are Iranian youth, especially in Tehran, who are secularized and westernized and who find the Islamic moral code oppressive”. They support Mousavi because they see him as more secular and westernized. They protest because they support Mousavi. Further, the suggestion that it’s “difficult for non-Iranians to understand” that the charges of fraud were a cause of the protests is ridiculous. It would be difficult for any person who ever turned on the news or picked up a newspaper not to understand that. Finally, conclusive evidence of electoral fraud has yet to be produced.
As an Iranian youth living inside Iran; I believe that what Mr. Ahmadi nejad said about Israel and its removal from globe, is the exact meaning of what he said in his interview and published by medias worldwide. And the way that Mr. Roberts supported him – that he did not actually mean it – is a fact which shows Mr. Roberts caprice with him.
If there were no fraud in the recent election why Iranian leaders – such as Ayatollah Khamenei – did not accept to repeat it in order to calm down people both inside and outside of Iran?!
Why they ended it up by killing innocent people which Mr. Roberts call them the group of disaffected youths? And I consider it very abusive because I saw even very old people in Iran streets during these protest by myself and of course world did so in pictures too.
I believe Mr. Roberts is a puppet of Islamic radicals in Iran … Not considering what they did to us – to Iranian people- needs a man with both no hart and no eye …
I am so sorry for him and the ones who thinks as he does.
Mr. Roberts is correct to say that Mr. Ahmadinejad never said he wants to “wipe Israel off the map”. This is pure propaganda. 1) This is an inaccurate translation and would more properly read something like “removed from the pages of history”. 2) He was quoting Khomeini. 3) The context of the remark was the need to remove cruel and oppressive regimes from power. Ahamdinejad’s other two examples, besides Israel, were Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and Shah Pahlavi’s Iran.
As for your question, I would start with the opposite assumption. If there was no fraud, why would Khameini agree to a new election? The very suggestion is absurd, and such a decision would be inequitable.
Finally, the fact that the protests resulted in a violent crackdown, as condemnable as it is, isn’t evidence that there was electoral fraud. Do you know of any actual evidence for your claim, or are these questions representative of the assumptions upon which you base it?
I think that the idea behind these articles is just feeding the Ahmadinejad’s propagenda in order to deviated Iranians’ democratic movement.
I think there are sufficent documents to prove that there has been a widespread fraud in the recent election. The movement of Iranian people cannot be associated with westerners, Of course some people of Iran are secular and westernized, That’s true. But I have to remind Mr. Roberts that many of Mousavi supporters does never support western liberal democracy. The majority of the people of Iran believe in an Islamic democratic society and not a western style. This is what people of Iran are pursuing , this cannot be linked to west. We, Iranian youth, never enjoy to have democratic society of west because we are committed to our religious thoughts and beliefs which I think makes it more unbelievable that people of Iran are struggling to create a color revolution.
Mr Mousavi as a man who was closest person to Ayatollah Khomeini will never come along with the idea which supported revolutions in Ukraine and Georgia.
The scenario which radical Ahmadinejad supporters are following is incomplete. Please let me know if Mousavi was supported by NED then why Guardian Counsil should qualify him? It is redicilous to say that they were not known of what Mousavi is gonna to do?
prior to 12th June elections, many of IRG (revolutionary guards) chiefs accused Mousavi of struggling to create Green revolution for several times,
So if they knew about it why they qualified him, According to law they could disqualify him before elections so if they knew about this why they did not disqualify him…
So I would remind you an important point thay we , in Iran , are not pursuing western democray, Georgian democray or any other country, we are pursuing democracy in the frame of Islam and not west.
Therefore I will warn you and Ahmadinejad radical supporters to NOT to try to link Iranian people movement to anyother western resources, Democracy and freedom is not specially for western societies. Democracy is a global need for any sociey.
Our democratic movement cannot be attached to West.
You, supporters of Ahmadinejad which may have been fueled by his mafia in ourside, are living outside Iran and will never be informed ot what are the demands of Iranian men and women to have a Islamic democratic society. Do not undermine our movements and do NOT try to spread these absurd nonsenses.
You’re welcome to share this evidence of electoral fraud you refer to.
It’s funny you write “we, In Iran” when you’re in the United States.
To Jeremy R. Hammond
You are wrong because: 1. Ahmadinejad meant annihilation (Persian: nabudi) of Israel (of course without mass public support) and not simply “wipe it out of pages of history” 2. He was not quoting Khomeini but repeating a slogan that ayatollah had used before. 3. “The context of the remark was the need to remove cruel and oppressive regimes from power”?! but it is better to know that Iranian monarch was Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi and not “Shah Pahlavi”
I was shocked by seeing you to such a high degree unaware of Iranian issues. I don’t know how much of 280 billion dollars of our oil revenues have been spent on propaganda. But it is better for you to study more our country to not look like simpletons.
I see Paul Roberts cooperative hand in weaving conspiracy theory of foreign meddling and producing pretext for Iranian regime’s bloody suppression. Shame on him.
1. Ahmadinejad made no threat against Israel. 2. Yes, he was quoting Khomeini. 3. The context of his remark was the need to remove cruel and oppressive regimes from power (Seriously? You’re making an issue that I referred to him by his title and family name rather than his full name? And using that as the basis for suggesting I’m ignorant? You’re going to have to do better than that).
There are perfectly good reasons to believe the U.S. is meddling, and a proven history of it in recent times.
None of the people who are arguing against this article can provide any facts for their claim that the election was fraudulent. On the other hand the evidence presented such as Timmerman’s claim of a green revolution one day before the election clearly is a fact that shows involvement of foreign hands in that country.
As for the comments that Ahmadinejad made about Israel, we have to understand that people who voted for him did so because it was a slap in the face of Israel. So by making those comments he appealed to his supporters as well as to those in the Arab world.
I just repeat what Dr. Mosadeq once said :
” I wish we had no oil ”
there is lots of things to say but I rather not to say anything.
Have fun with my country’s oil and my peoples money Mr. Roberts and other fellows.
Thats what all saying the whoile Soft revolution was prepared by CIA. we have learned from the past the american governemnt is the most evil orgenized on earth, we are ready for usa now, come to war baby
I don’t have any doubt that one day, and I hope very soon, we will show the connections between paid journalists such as Paul Roberts and Jeremy Hammond and the Iranian Shari’atmadari intelligence and propagandist organization. Our nation’s oil-money now is in your pockets. And that is the reason why you fear a modern and democratic Iran.
“I don’t have any doubt that one day, and I hope very soon, we will show the connections between paid journalists such as Paul Roberts and Jeremy Hammond and the Iranian Shari’atmadari intelligence and propagandist organization.”
Now that’s the most bizarre conspiracy theory I’ve heard in ages. I guess it’s easier for Sohrab to believe little ol’ me is an Iranian intelligence agent than that the CIA took the opportunity to foment unrest against the regime during the election. I’ll let intelligent readers decide which is more plausible.
And I’m all for a modern and democratic Iran, Sohrab.
Yes. For sure there are clear sign of USA nationals meddling in Iran. Paul Roberts article was translated in Persian and published in Keyhan Newspaper (one branch of the same organization Sohrab mentioned) and widely publicized by Iranian governmental mass media. And it is now one of the main instruments to suppress our peaceful innocent nation’s movement. You are meddling. It is clear. You are cooperating with mass media branch of this coup.
Mr Roberts! take your bloody hands out of our country.
That is interesting how intolerant some of the Iranian people who post comment on this page are. So let me get this right : any body who thinks foreign hands are involved in the recent unrest in Iran is on Ahmadinejad’s pay roll right?
We all know being agent of a state that sponsors Hamas and Hezbollah is illegal in the U.S so if any of you have evidence that Paul Roberts or Jeremy are on the payroll of Iran they should report them to Home Land Security or SHUT UP.
bonita costa, there have also been a number of people claiming to be Iranians in Iran who are posting to the comments from IP addresses in the U.S. So you can add dishonesty to the intolerance of some.
I agree with Dr. roberts. Unfortunately USA do many problems for Iran. But Iran goes forward strongly .
When in 1953 USA toppled Dr. Mosaddeq’s democratic government, it blocked Iranian democratic movement for decades. In 1979 when Iranian people decided to change their destiny, USA again meddled and diverted a movement that was libertarian in its essence. And now when a democratic movement is taking place, you, by playing another trick, try to hinder this movement. Ok. If you have any hard evidence, please disclose it. What have you said up to now, all have been accusations. By accusing, you simply repeat what USA has done before. (توقع ندارید که تصور کنیم کاسة داغ تر از آش تشریف دارید)
The problem is not simply as you pretend. “Iranian youth, especially in Tehran, who are secularized and westernized and who find the Islamic moral code oppressive.” As far as relates to Islamic aspects, it is a misuse of power in the name of Islam. There is much more that you ignored.
By supporting fundamentalists in Afghanistan, USA became its ultimate victim. You want disclose connections? Ok. Disclose secret connections between USA and Middle Eastern non-democratic regimes such as Saudis. What is between Wahhabis and USA? What sort of benefit you get by mobilizing and supporting armed groups in Middle East? What sort of benefit you get by helping to suppress Iranian people’s movement?
Mr. Roberts! Countries can be independent in another way. People will defend their independence. They will gain their rights by a democratic movement.
Finally, if I suppose that the motive of your analysis is essentially irrelevant to Iran, I must conclude that you probably have problems with your government. But if so, why Iranian people must pay for that?
Please be honest.
Nobody’s trying to hinder democracy here. I don’t know why you suggest why anyone should “disclose” the U.S. relationship of Saudi Arabia. It’s not a secret.
Seems economic crisis has put Robertie into hardship and pressure. No matter Robertie. I understand you. Have nice time. Enjoy oily dollars.
Mr. Roberts!
watch this week’s Jome Prayer 12 O’clock Tehran time carefully.
You’ll see who we are and what we want.
And be sure that we never let you or your friends interfere in our destiny or change it as you like.
Someday soon every one will understand who is right and who is wrong …
So see you soon Mr. Roberts
8 Votes FOR Mr. Roberts (7 of it by Hammund) so we count it as 2 !!!
and
12 Votes AGAINST his idea .
Let me tell you who is right and who is wrong before hand ….
)
and by the way you are all fake!!! you are stilling the FP international journal’s name (foreign policy on this address –www.foreignpolicy.com– )
why do you lie? … what is your benefit in it?
Try to think independently.
Green Youth, thanks for planting the suggestion for me to vote up the article. I hadn’t done so previously. Nor can I do so again.
There’s no monopoly on the term “foreign policy”. When I created this site, the URL foreignpolicyjournal.com wasn’t taken. Got a problem with me taking it? Is that the best criticism you’ve got? If you want to add something intelligent to the discussion, please feel free. But this–and a few other posts as well–borders on spam. You’ve been notified.
What is now clear and undeniable is that this article has now become a sword in the hands of suppressors. Propaganda machinery of regime now systematically publishes translations of this article to justify its cruelties. Dozens of our brothers and sisters are killed and hundreds more in prisons are under torture. Mr. Roberts can’t be unaware of this events. So he can come here and apologize for what has written here and explicitly condemn brutality in Iran.
We are millions. We are in Iran and all over the world. We can take appropriate measures. But before that it is better to give a time to Mr. Roberts to come here and apologize.
It seems that the responsibility of presenting the source of Paul Robert’s article wrongly as “Foreign Policy” falls on Iranian governmental media. Apart from that, the Persian versions are mostly manipulated with many interpolations and cuts and in many times they don’t even mention the name of the Iranian interviewer. This a domain that unfortunately we can’t do anything. TV and Radio are governmental and the few seemingly not-governmental newspapers have not any possibility to (if they wish) inform people .
Is it possible to expect an official declaration from Foreign Policy’s side (not this site) regarding this kind of informational misdemeanor of Iranian media?
To Paul Roberts,
You may consider your statements as private opinion, that are naturally allowed in a society which grants freedom of speech to all its citizens. But you must care what you say in one country the same statement may have very different implications in another one: Giving e.g. justification or even pretext for slauthering people in another country.
I prefer to look to its clearer side. Better to take a closer look to Iranians and Iranian people.
Your friend
Let’s believe Mr. Paul Robert. Just in a time that our nation is under pressure, he comes here and discloses secret links!!! What have you thought about our nation? By granting $20, $80 or $400 millions do you think you are directing what happens in Iran. Ah? Are you a MEGALOMANIAC? I feel pity for poor tax-payer Americans who are become victims of their freak politicians. Changing or destablizing a regim with such sums of money?!! Are you joking? Please don’t be ashamed. Come here and disclose other sums…
If you want to do something honorable and constructive, you can launch a campaign against all kinds of economic aids possible from American side. We help you also. We will dishonor all who give and all who receive. Ok? And please don’t defame our movement by your irresponsible statements.
I repeat again: WE DON’T NEED YOUR DOLLARS. Keep them in your pockets. 30 years ago we changed many things with bare hands. We are the same nation. We don’t need even sympathy of any kind from American politicians.
To “Long Live Iran”: What can I say? The people like you that sell their country are cheap bastards! That is why 20 million can buy 13 million cheap ignorant!