Shah's exiled son: Don't attack Iran

[democratic]

Source: Haaretz

Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of the last shah of Iran, suggests taking Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's threat to annihilate Israel very seriously. However, he suggests refraining from military action against his country.

That's not what scares the regime there," he explains. "What scares it are the opponents from within, who should be strengthened. An attack from outside could give this regime carte blanche to do anything, and even lead to a nationalist awakening that would bring into its camp people who do not belong to it now."

Pahlavi spoke with Haaretz at a gathering in Prague of dissidents from 17 countries that was sponsored by the Adelson Institute for Strategic Studies at the Shalem Center. For the past 19 years he has lived in Washington, where he married a woman of Iranian descent and fathered three daughters. He operates from the exile he entered at age 19 like a bench player who practices determinedly for the moment when he is called to step back onto the court. Two years ago he even went on a hunger strike to demand the release of political prisoners, even though he cannot escape the fact that during his father's reign there were many political prisoners in Iran.

I am not saying there were no mistakes made under the previous regime," he says. "But you have to remember the context of that time. Those were the days of the Cold War, and there was in Iran a sense that the Soviet Union wanted to turn us into its satellite. I can understand why the public went along with the revolution, but I also know that no one wished for the tragic result of today."

Read more: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/868852.html

[dEMOK]

1. Wow!!!...

"I am not saying there were no mistakes made under the previous regime," he says. "But you have to remember the context of that time. Those were the days of the Cold War, and there was in Iran a sense that the Soviet Union wanted to turn us into its satellite. I can understand why the public went along with the revolution, but I also know that no one wished for the tragic result of today."

Now there's a realistic perspective from someone who was there.

Thank you democratic. (K&R)

on edit - name correction

[PaulaFarrell]

8. Realistic perspective in what way?

He is being an apologist for a brutal, torture-loving regime.

The sense that the USSR wanted Iran as a satellite was primarily held by the anti-commnunist loonies in Washington, and not based on actual actions by the USSR. The overtthrow of Mossadegh was partly about oil (no surprise there) - Iran nationalised it - and partly just US paranoia about anything smacking of socialism.

I suggest you read this article if you want a realistic perspective:

http://interactive.zogby.com/fuse/messageview.cfm?catid=24&threadid=18852

[dEMOK]

11. I was referring only to the quote I posted... nt

[PaulaFarrell]

14. Right

which is what I was rebutting

[EST]

2. Sounds like good advice.

Not that good advice has ever had much effect with tyrants.

[DFW]

3. This has always been the case

The Soviet Union KGB always spent at least as much time (if not more)
on the suppression of its own dissidents as it did on the Cold War with
the West. Romania's Securitaţe, Castro's DGI, Pinochet's goons, repressive
regimes always fear internal dissent more than they fear attack from without.
Bush's organized suppression of free elections, along with his artificial
manipulation of the press and harassment of demonstrations of those who
disagree with his regime are similar symptoms, although the totalitarian
infrastructure he would have liked to have was not yet there (hence the fact
that there will be an election in 2008, and we don't know who will get
elected).


The Ayatollahs are no different, and when one considers the a huge portion
of Iran's population is under 30, men and women will at some point get tired
of getting arrested for holding hands in public. A small population can be
repressed far more brutally (i.e. Albania vs. Poland, Saudi Arabia vs. Iran),
but a large population is not as easy to keep in check. Iran still maintains
contacts with the rest of the world, and the desire for internal reform is
huge there, as, indeed it was under the Shah. The Ayatollahs don't fear our
cruise missiles nearly as much as they fear our music and our dress codes.

Furthermore, there is a huge community of Iranians who live outside Iran, but
visit regularly. Many of these Iranians bring back ideas and information that
are detrimental to the current regime.

The use of American weapons against Iran would unite any potential friends
we have in Iran (and potential friends there are many) against us. A
declaration of no intent to attack Iran would strengthen those inside
the country who want liberalization, and can point to the lack of external
threat as justification for reform within.

Never forget that the biggest contributor to Bush's "victory" in 2004 was
not Kenneth Blackwell, but Osama bin Laden. If the 9/11 attacks had never
taken place, Bush might not even have been renominated by his own party.

The Shah's son is correct. Whether or not the Bushies know or care is another
matter entirely.

[dEMOK]

4. The Bushies (in power) not only don't care about reality...

...they depend on (and promulgate!) irrational fear as a means to stay in (illegally obtained) power.

[ShortnFiery]

13. OMG, that phony looking "OsamaTron Video" swayed people?

That was such shotty work (the jerky Osama video) if that made the difference in the 2004 election, we're DOOMed I tell you, DOOMED!!! <tongue-in-cheek> :P

[David__77]

5. His "excuse" for his father's crimes is ludicrous and hollow.

All kinds of fascists excused their murder and crimes by pointing to "Bolshevism." The SAVAK secret police of the Shah were terrible torturers and killers. I myself met one man whose eye was gouged out by the monsters. This "royal" son is a moral accomplice.


Torture victims of the Shah's secret police (SAVAK), Tehran, Jan. 1979, Iran

[19jet54]

6. Democracy comes from within...

... the people must choose for themselves; it is their country, not ours.

[PaulaFarrell]

7. 'mistakes made under the previous regime'

oh please, talk about rewriting history. If all the old shah did was 'make mistakes' due to Cold War, then I guess Bush is only 'making mistakes' today.

http://interactive.zogby.com/fuse/messageview.cfm?catid=24&threadid=18852

"The notorious Iranian secret police, SAVAK, created under the guidance of the CIA and Israel, spread its tentacles all over the world to punish Iranian dissidents. According to a former CIA analyst on Iran, SAVAK was instructed in torture techniques by the Agency. Amnesty International summed up the situation in 1976 by noting that Iran had the "highest rate of death penalties in the world, no valid system of civilian courts and a history of torture which is beyond belief. No country in the world has a worse record in human rights than Iran." "

[David__77]

9. We still have the blowback today.

The hostages from the embassy was just the beginning. And somehow US policymakers think that committing more crimes will solve the problem. No, it just creates more people committed to revenge.

[kskiska]

10. Reza believes it's his destiny to inherit his father's title

and all its trappings, even though it was the Americans who installed his father on his throne. He's spent his whole life waiting for his chance.

[ShortnFiery]

12. "I am not saying there were no mistakes made under the previous regime"

That's a huge understatement by The Shah of Iran's exiled son! The Shah had Secret Police that would make the former Nazi SS envy.

The Shah was A THUG. But he was "our (the USA) thug" which automatically makes him Double Plus Good in the world of the BushBotBorg. :puke:

If you think The Shah's exiled son would rule any differently than his murderous belated father, think again? :grr: