US Alliance for Democratic Iran

Commentary

PMOI vs. US Secretary of State: A Victory for Civil Rights
By Allan Gerson, Lawyer and former Counsel to the US Delegation to the United Nations
The Huffington Post
July 19, 2010

Last Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Washington ruled that the U.S. State Department cannot arbitrarily designate the People's Mujahadin Organization of Iran (PMOI) as a foreign terrorist organization, thus imposing criminal penalties on any American citizen who offers so much as a nickel to the group.

The State Department had since 1997 -- with little or no explanation- repeatedly re-designated the PMOI as a foreign terrorist organization. In doing so, it ignored the organization's assertions that it had long since abandoned any commitment to violence, and -- as it had made clear -- that its militant actions of the past had been directed against the mullahs of Iran, not American citizens.

The court found the State Department could not arbitrarily invoke the need for diplomatic flexibility to deny the PMOI, or any similarly charged group, with the basic due process protection of ensuring that the findings against it were based on a principled and reasoned assessment of evidence.

The decision represents a victory for all Americans opposed to the perversion of legitimate national security interests by giving the State Department unfettered discretion to determine who deserves to be labeled as a terrorist entity... Read More

Commentary

Iran: Dialogue, Divest, Delist
By David Johnson of the US Alliance for Democratic Iran
The Global Politician
July 18, 2010

Earlier this month, Iran was slapped with a new round of United Nations Security Council sanctions for its nuclear noncompliance. Offers of meaningful dialogue and sanctions by the United States have slowed Iran�s sprint toward nuclear weapons capability. Unfortunately, sanctions have not been effective compelling Iranian nuclear compliance. Still, sanctions are an effective approach to coordinate the international community to achieve consensus and act effectively, at some point in the future. It is becoming increasingly evident that offers of dialogue should be directed toward Iran�s democratic opposition.

In addition to sanctions, the international community would be wise to accelerate voluntary divestment from Iranian business ventures. It is equally prudent for the Obama Administration to remove Iran�s principle democratic opposition from the Department of State�s list of foreign terrorist organizations (FTO). Western financial investment and suppressing opponents, both used invariably as incentives to encourage Iranian compliance, have instead encouraged Tehran�s nuclear noncompliance... Read More

Commentary

Iran's Medieval Justice System
By ILAN BERMAN

The Wall Street Journal

July 16, 2010

For years now, Sakineh Ashtiani has been incarcerated in an Iranian prison, sentenced to death by stoning for the "crime" of adultery. Until earlier this month, the case of the 43-year-old mother of two was known only to the select few who have been following her sad fate at the hands of the Islamic Republic. Today, however, her name has become a rallying cry to end the mullahs' suppression of human�and particularly women's�rights.

A widow living in the northern Iranian city of Tabriz, Mrs. Ashtiani was jailed in 2005 for adultery. She was convicted the following year of having "illicit relationships" with two men following the death of her husband, and received 100 lashes, the punishment Islam stipulates for sexual relations outside of marriage. Mrs. Ashtiani's ordeal did not end there. Her case was reopened in 2007, and new, graver charges of adultery while in wedlock were added. She was convicted once again, and this time sentenced to death by public stoning.

Instituted in the aftermath of the 1979 Islamic revolution, the medieval practice entails the partial burial of offenders and their subsequent death at the hands of bystanders hurling rocks. Accurate statistics are nearly impossible to come by, but human rights activists estimate that between 1979 and 1997 an average of 10 people were killed annually in this way by the regime. In 2002, the Iranian judiciary proposed a formal moratorium on the punishment, but it continues to be meted out at the discretion of individual judges. Currently, eight men and three women�including Mrs. Ashtiani�are said to be awaiting the gruesome penalty.

Only a growing outcry from international human rights groups and foreign leaders prompted the Iranian government over the weekend to stay Mrs. Ashtiani's execution, which was scheduled for later this month. At least for the moment, her case has been placed "under review" on humanitarian grounds.... Read More

Commentary

Brazil's outreach to Iran ignores brutal repression
The Washington Post (Editorial)

Saturday, May 15, 2010

LAST SUNDAY, Iran hanged five Kurdish dissidents, including a 28-year-old woman, who said they had been tortured into confessing to charges of terrorism. On Monday it announced that the Iranian-Canadian journalist Maziar Bahari, who covered last year's fraudulent presidential election for Newsweek, had been sentenced in absentia to 74 lashes and 13 years in prison. This is probably just the beginning of a brutal wave of repression aimed at preventing the opposition Green Movement from rallying as next month's anniversary of the election approaches.

But on Saturday, Brazilian President Luiz Ignacio Lula da Silva will arrive in Tehran in yet another effort to "engage" the extremist clique of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Mr. Lula and Turkish President Abdullah Gul claim to be making a last effort to broker a deal with the regime that will avert another round of U.N. sanctions over its nuclear program. No one outside their own governments thinks they will succeed. And will Mr. Lula even bother to mention the blood spilled by his hosts this week? Don't hold your breath... Read More

Commentary

Iran hangs a little fish

The Washington Times (Editorial)

May 11, 2010

A year ago, The Washington Times helped bring the world's attention to the plight of Farzad Kamangar, a Kurdish school-teacher wrongly accused of being a terrorist by the Islamic regime in Tehran. He spent almost four years of physical and mental torture in Iran's prison system. Mr. Kamangar's suffering ceased Sunday at the end of a hangman's noose. He was 34 years old.

Mr. Kamangar was killed along with four other "moharebs" or "enemies of God," whom the regime said were "convicted of carrying out terrorist acts." Three of the cases were still undergoing mandatory review when the executions were rushed through. Phone connections to Tehran's infamous Evin Prison were cut over the weekend while the executions were prepared and carried out. The regime did not notify the families or defense attorneys of the condemned in advance, as required by law - they learned of the execution from a press release. For a regime that claims to be the instrument of God, it behaved more like a criminal cabal with something to hide... Read More

USADI Commentary

Tehran�s Interference with Iraq�s Elections
Commentary by the US Alliance for Democratic Iran

March 2, 2010

This Sunday when general elections are held in Iraq, we will witness if Tehran has been successful to turn years of its covert and overt political, security, and financial meddling into political gains for its Iraqi surrogates.

We will also see how successful the Iraqis of Shiite and Sunni backgrounds will be in thwarting Tehran�s plan by electing non-sectarian and independent Iraqis to the Parliament to form the next government.

Iran rulers have tremendous amount of experience in exploiting democratic processes such as elections to advance their anti-democratic agenda. After all, this is what they have practiced for three decades in Iran. In Iraq, they are putting their know-how in practice so that the next Iraqi government would be even more Tehran-leaning than what it is now. They channel Iran�s oil money � at the expense of further economic hardship for Iranians � through the Quds Force into Iraq to buy candidates and votes.

When this ploy meets the innate Iraqis� proud sense of nationalism, the clerical regime puts the Quds Forces and its Iraqi operatives to work to bomb, assassinate, and fuel the sectarian strife.

The admirable tenacity and resilience of Iraqi people and their deep sense of nationalism is indeed the most vital element in blocking Iran�s westwards destabilizing advance. This explains why, immediately after the 2003 war, Tehran began targeting Iraqi nationalism and assassinating Iraqi nationalist in the military, security, and political spheres by its proxies.

The secular and nationalist Iraqis must be helped and empowered in their defining struggle to save Iraq from the expansionist and domineering designs of Iran rulers. The post-election period - and until the governing coalition is formed - would expectedly be turbulent and unstable. During this period and in the remaining days until the Sunday elections, Washington needs to be fully prepared to frustrate Iran�s political and intelligence blitz and covert actions.

An Iraqi tribal leader recently told the TIME magazine that once the U.S. pulls out of Iraq, �Iran will take us.� Countless Iraqi and American lives have been sacrificed for a professed democratic and independent Iraq. It would be a travesty to let Tehran hijack Iraq and turn the whole region upside down. (USADI)

USADI Commentary

Tough Sanctions Would Help Democracy Movement in Iran

Commentary by the US Alliance for Democratic Iran

February 9, 2010

As talks of imposing new international sanctions on Iran�s regime continue in Washington, there are critics who contend sanctions would have no decisive impact on Tehran�s behavior and, even worse, they would cause the anti-government opposition to rally around the leadership.

These critics � many of whom ardent advocates of diplomatic and economic engagement with Iran�s rulers - also maintain that sanctions would hurt the citizens more than the government and consequently would shift people�s resentment toward the west.

Ironically, for years the critics of Iran sanctions had argued that: the regime is popular and well-entrenched and sanctions would only further provoke the already belligerent rulers. Therefore there should be no sanctions. Since beginning of the anti-regime uprisings last June and with appearance of deep fissures within the apex of the leadership in Tehran, some of these critics have changed their mind. Still others have remained opposed to sanctions. They have done so by adjusting their justification according to the post-election headlines from Iran. They mind-bogglingly maintain that: imposing sanctions would be tantamount to throwing a life line to the weakened ayatollahs.

It seems that regardless of the political balance of power in Iran, the sanction critics always concoct a superficially plausible storyline to debunk it. Should it come as a surprise that many of these critics have ties with certain financial interests seeking or already having a foothold in Iran?

Notwithstanding the murky motives of some critics, and from a political standpoint alone, their fairytale-like rational flies in the face of realities in Iran's streets and roof tops. After three decades of mullahs' reign of terror and plunder, and eight months of cold-blooded murder, torture, whole scale arrest, and gang-raping of male and female protesters, the divide between people and the clerical regime is far too wide and irreparable for the movement�s U-turn. The courageous determination of people to continue with their uprising in the face of officially sanctioned savagery clearly demonstrate they are done with this regime and seek its fall.

Under this circumstance, crippling sanctions, particularly those targeting the ayatollahs� system of suppression and those aimed at isolating it diplomatically and politically, will be indeed welcomed by the democratic opposition. There won�t be any rallying around the regime. There would be only praise for policy of siding with the Iranians.

As for the possible hardships caused by the sanctions, one should keep in mind that already the Iranian people are dealing with very sever economic hardships thanks to the corrupt rule of ayatollahs. Since 1979, they have used Iran's national wealth to create a horrific security and intelligence system used to suppress Iranians, to sponsor terrorism in its neighborhood and across the Middle east, and to develop weapons of mass destruction and nuclear bombs.

Under Mahmoud Ahmadinejad�s presidency, these policies and their subsequent financial impact on the ordinary citizens have only intensified. Therefore, it would be quite illogical to contend that any perceived hardship resulting from sanctions would qualitatively change the existing political alignments in Iran to the benefit of the regime. Besides, the historical facts from the 1906 Constitutional Movement, the 1953 nationalization movement, and the 1979 anti-monarchic revolution clearly indicate that Iranians have been willing to endure various kinds of hardship when it was viewed as a necessary price for securing their freedom and independence.

Let�s make no mistake: Sanctions by themselves, even the toughest ones, will not be enough to dissuade Tehran from it rogue behavior and nuclear weapons development. They would, however, go a long way to economically and politically undermine a murderous regime which is now faced with its arch nemesis at home: a national pro-democracy opposition movement which seeks regime change. This is why an effective economic, diplomatic, and political sanction regime, far from being a life line for the ayatollahs, is a strategic enabler for the democratic movement. (USADI)