Where
We Can Agree on Iran
By Mark Dubowitz and
Daniel B. Shapiro
Politico
January 1, 2018
Imagine a free, democratic, independent and wealthy Iran
giving full expression to the beauty of Persian culture and the brains and
spirit of its people. Imagine a political, clerical and military elite that
doesn’t steal its country’s patrimony while brutally repressing its own
people and terrorizing its neighbors. We are long-time friends who have
disagreed vehemently on the wisdom of President Barack Obama’s nuclear deal
with Iran; Dan is Obama’s former ambassador to Israel, and Mark is one of that
agreement’s most persistent critics. But we agree with equal passion that
Americans, regardless of party or position on the nuclear deal, should be
supporting the aspirations of Iranians to be free from their brutal and corrupt
rulers. That’s the dream of the tens of thousands of Iranians who have taken
to the streets this past weekend in dozens of cities across the country.
Iranians are on the streets voicing fury about corruption,
inflation and unemployment—but they are also directing their ire against the
regime’s foreign adventurism in Syria, Lebanon and Gaza and against the
billions of dollars provided to terrorist proxies like Hezbollah. The Iranian
clerical regime is a cruel, human-rights abusing, terrorism-sponsoring menace
that is destabilizing the Middle East, developing and proliferating missiles and
seeking nuclear weapons. It runs an economy so far incapable of capitalizing on
the relief of sanctions for the good of its people because it is
regime-controlled, socialist, centrally planned and stifling to private
entrepreneurship. Companies controlled by the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, his
Islamic Revolutionary Guards and the clerical establishment provide billions to
grease their corrupt patronage networks. They have permeated key sectors of the
economy, creating legal and reputational risks that have sidelined both foreign
and private Iranian investors.
One clear takeaway from these protests is that, as
outsiders, we don’t know enough. The causes of the protests are not
monolithic, their scale is significant but not necessarily determinative, the
trajectory is uncertain, the leadership unclear and the regime’s response is
likely to be repressive. We must approach these protests with humility in
understanding their ultimate meaning and impact. They are big, bold, widespread,
impressive and heartfelt—but we have no idea if these protests will mushroom
into a genuine threat to the regime. We hope so; any prospect of shortening this
Iranian regime’s lease on life should be welcomed. If this movement could lead
to the end of Khamenei’s regime, it would be a boon mostly for Iranians but
also for Lebanese, Iraqis, Syrians, Yemenis, Israelis, Palestinians, Saudis,
Emiratis—and for Americans.
There is no reason for anyone who worked in the Obama
administration or supported the nuclear deal to not embrace these arguments. The
rationale for the deal was to roll back this odious regime from the precipice of
a nuclear weapon so that the United States could confront other pressing Iranian
threats. The Obama administration’s belief that this was, and remains, the
best (or least bad) strategic call, given the nuclear threat, need not lessen
our antipathy for this thuggish regime nor our hope for its demise. Deal
supporters should also be open to dialogue with deal opponents, whose concerns
over nuclear restrictions that sunset, inspection rights of military sites that
might prove insufficient and a missile program that is expanding has led them to
raise valid concerns. Chief among these: the need for measures to augment and
extend the deal’s provisions to prevent the eventual development of an
industrial-size, advanced centrifuge-powered, near-zero nuclear weapons breakout
capability and intercontinental ballistic missile program in the hands of this
regime.
Nuclear deal supporters and opponents should resist the
urge to make this a “gotcha moment” for people with whom they have tussled
on Iran policy. This undermines the cause of ensuring broad, bipartisan support
for peaceful protests, and hopefully real political change. Let’s focus on the
Iranian people and what the United States and our European allies can do to
advance their aspirations, not our own political squabbles. We can all agree
that hundreds of thousands of people protesting massive regime corruption and
repression should worry autocrats all over the world, from Iran’s Khamenei to
Russia’s Vladimir Putin to Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
What is to be done? Americans of both parties should speak
up. Iranians, like dissidents everywhere, are looking for support from abroad.
The Trump administration’s early statements have been important—as have
statements from Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Bernie Sanders, and Republican and
Democratic lawmakers. More attention to their cause, and more media coverage,
may help stay the security forces’ hand and encourage governments to isolate
the Iranian regime.
But more is required. First, officials both current and
former should be flooding the airwaves on Persian-language television and radio
to express their support for the Iranian people’s human rights and
aspirations. Let’s provide details on the stolen assets held by regime and
IRGC officials, and the vast sums spent on Iran’s destabilizing regional
interventions. U.S. taxpayers have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in
Voice of America’s Persian Service and Radio Farda. Let’s use them. Keep
politics out of it. Condemn the regime’s human rights abuses and corruption;
don’t re-litigate the Iran deal.
Second, Congress should pass a joint bipartisan resolution
modeled on the language it passed overwhelmingly in 2012 in the Iran Freedom and
Counter-Proliferation Act in support of the “efforts made by the people of
Iran to promote the establishment of basic freedoms that build the foundation
for the emergence of a freely elected, open, and democratic political system.”
It again should condemn the government of Iran’s “massive, systematic, and
extraordinary violations of the human rights of its citizens.” Update the
language and get 535 members of Congress to endorse it.
Third, the White House, with an assist from the Republican
and Democratic leadership in Congress, should use authorities in bipartisan
statutes to target the regime for corruption through the Global Magnitsky Act
and for human rights abuses through the many executive orders and statutes on
the books. The ongoing crackdown on the peaceful protests will provide
additional targets for designation. Make no mistake: Iranian regime officials
don’t like being the target of travel bans, the loss of access to the global
financial system or the infamy that comes with being named and shamed. In this
regard, our European allies are particularly well positioned to support us given
their impressive track record in calling out Iranian government repression, and
their countries’ more extensive business ties in Iran. To increase the impact
on those designated, they should deny the access to Europe that many
representatives of the regime desire.
Finally, the Trump administration, with bipartisan backing,
should use sections 402 and 403 of the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human
Rights Act, passed with overwhelming support in 2012, to threaten sanctions
against global entities that supply the Iranian regime with tools of repression
and censorship. The White House should seek to ensure that companies like
Telegram, Twitter and Instagram are not complying with Iranian regime requests
to block channels used by protesters to organize and communicate. These
companies can be on the right side of history by doing all they can to give
Iranians the access they need to evade regime surveillance.
No matter what we say and do, the regime will seek to blame
the United States for the protests. It is already happening. That is a reason
for being smart by keeping the Iranian people at the forefront to avoid
inadvertently weakening their initiative, but not for doing nothing. As a
further measure to debunk the regime’s claims and proving our support for the
people, the Trump administration should consider ending the blanket travel ban
on Iranian citizens.
This is an important moment. The Iranian protests could
contribute, one day, to a peaceful Iran leveraging the initiative of its
remarkable people to build a free and prosperous society, at peace with its
neighbors and the United States. That goal—even as we still argue about the
nuclear deal—should unite our fractious political elites, at least on one
issue.