Author: Eli Clifton

from LobeLog: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for February 2nd, 2011:

The New York Times: Yossi Klein Halevi, a fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute and a contributing editor at The New Republic, writes, “Israelis fear that Egypt will go the way of Iran or Turkey, with Islamists gaining control through violence or gradual co-optation.” Hezbollah’s increasingly strong role in Lebanon, Hamas’s control of the Gaza Strip, and the downturn in Israel-Turkey relations leads Halevi to comment, “[A]n Islamist Egypt could produce the ultimate Israeli nightmare: living in a country surrounded by Iran’s allies or proxies.” While the Egyptian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood has forsworn violence, “it is small comfort to Israelis, who fear that the Brotherhood’s nonviolence has been a tactical maneuver and know that its worldview is rooted in crude anti-Semitism.”

National Review Online: The American Enterprise Institute’s Michael Rubin opines on the developing situation in Egypt and suggests that the Muslim Brotherhood and “anti-Western forces will look to blame Egypt’s problems on the U.S.” “What worries me is this: Today marks the 32nd anniversary of Khomeini’s return to Iran. Most people making dark allusions to Iran forget that more than nine months passed between Khomeini’s return and the seizure of the U.S. Embassy,” says Rubin. “The question then becomes, what grievances can the Muslim Brotherhood or other anti-Western forces manufacture in those nine months to try to appeal beyond their natural constituency of perhaps 25 percent?” Rubin concludes that Obama should avoid making George W. Bush’s mistake of supporting elections in Gaza and “enabl[ing] political groups which maintain militias to claim the mantle of electoral legitimacy.”

Los Angeles Times: Jonah Goldberg, also based at The American Enterprise Institute, warns that the democracy movement in Egypt could turn into “a replay of the Iranian revolution, in which justified popular discontent with an authoritarian ruler was exploited by Islamists who ultimately imposed an even crueler brand of tyranny.” Goldberg goes on to compare political participation of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt to a “contagion.”

from LobeLog: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for February 1st, 2011:

The Wall Street Journal: Council on Foreign Relations senior fellow Max Boot writes, “[I]t does scant justice to the complexity of the situation to claim that Mr. Mubarak was a superb ally, or to imagine that we can manage an easy transition to a post-Mubarak regime.” Boot uses a series of quotes catalogued by the controversial Middle East Media Research Institute showing “rabid anti-Semitism and anti-Westernism that polluted Egypt’s state-controlled news media.” Boot doesn’t find Mohammed ElBaredei to be an attractive alternative to Mubarak because “[h]e called the Gaza Strip ‘the world’s largest prison’ and declared that it was imperative to ‘open the borders, end the blockade.’ Boot adds, “Mr. ElBaradei also spoke glowingly of Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has assailed Israel in harsh terms and voted against United Nations sanctions on Iran.”

The Wall Street Journal: Ronen Bergman, an intelligence analyst for Yedioth Ahronoth, an Israeli daily, draws lessons from the fall of the Shah in Iran that apply to the current situation in Egypt, and recommends that the U.S. stand by Mubarak or risk repeating the mistakes that led to “the establishment of an Islamic regime in Tehran that has been no friend to the U.S.” Bergman concludes, “Past experience suggests that if Mr. Mubarak’s regime is toppled, not only will American interests suffer, but the cause of freedom in Egypt could be set back dramatically. And the U.S. will have contributed to a Middle East that is less stable and more dangerous than it is today.”

AOL News: The American Enterprise Institute’s Michael Rubin opines that the Obama administration must be careful to avoid an “Iran-like tragedy in Egypt” but Mubarak might not be the lynchpin to maintaining U.S. interests in Egypt. “The true value of Egypt was its peace treaty with Israel, an event that predated Mubarak’s rise,” writes Rubin. “Many analysts see the shadow of Iran’s Islamic revolution in the Egyptian chaos. One parallel is certain: Should Mubarak flee, it will be the end of the beginning rather than the beginning of the end,” he warns. Rubin concludes, “If the White House is to avoid an Iran-like tragedy, it must stay one step ahead of the Brotherhood, refuse to be a populist foil and guarantee the September elections, and bestow legitimacy only upon those groups that eschew violence and abide by the Egyptian constitution.”

from LobeLog: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for January 31st, 2011:

Council on Foreign Relations: Elliott Abrams blogs on the jailed American hikers and USAID contractor in Iran and concludes that it is time for the Obama administration to ratchet up demands for their release. He asks rhetorically, “I hope we have conveyed to the regime that if a hair on their heads is injured, there will be hell to pay—immediately. Should we go further right now, and tell the ayatollahs to let them go by a date certain or suffer some sanction? Bluffing would be counterproductive, so if we make that statement we must follow through with a blow to some Iranian asset.” Abrams acknowledges that making demands for the prisoners’ release might backfire, but reminds his readers that American prestige is on the line. “[W]e are paying a price by acting as if we were Belgium or Costa Rica, unable to do more than wring our hands and plead. We are reducing respect for the United States in a capital where the level of respect matters, Tehran,” he writes. “We are allowing two fellow citizens to be used as human sacrifices by an odious regime that puts no value on human life, and pays little price for doing so.”

The Washington Post: Jennifer Rubin, writing on her Right Turn blog, attacks the Obama administration’s unwillingness to publicly denounce Hosni Mubarak or immediately cut aid to Egypt. She ends her post with a brief swipe at the administration’s hesitancy to take a harder line with Iran, writing, “[L]et’s not forget the most egregious mistake: failing to recognize the nature of the Iranian regime and confront the aggression of its proxies in the region.” She concludes, “Is it any wonder the Obama team is now struggling to keep up with events in Egypt?”

Tablet Magazine: The Hudson Institute’s Lee Smith examines the U.S.’s relationship to Egyptian protestors and the test of “George W. Bush’s Freedom Agenda.” He writes, “If Egypt moves out of the American fold, it might well align itself with Iran,” or worse yet, “…it would challenge the Iranians, in the way regional competition has worked since 1948—by seeing who can pose the greatest threat to Israel.” Smith takes issue with the media’s portrayal of Mohamed ElBaredei as a leader of the democracy movement. Attacking his record at the IAEA, Smith writes, “[T]his so-called reformer distorted his inspectors’ reports on Iran and effectively paved the way for the Islamic Republic’s march toward a nuclear bomb.” Smith concludes that liberal democracy in Egypt will fail because young Arabs have an irrational hatred of Israel and because “…the United States will not come to the aid of its liberal allies, or strengthen the moderate Muslims against the extremists… the Freedom Agenda is not going to work, at least not right now.” He continues, “The underlying reason then is Arab political culture, where real democrats and genuine liberals do not stand a chance against the men with guns.”

The Wall Street Journal: Former George W. Bush National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley writes about the possible outcomes of pro-democracy protests in Egypt. In one scenario, Mubarak rides out the crisis and calls for elections later in the year. Hadley compares this option to the government following Pakistani elections in 2008. “[I]t is a democratic government, and by its coming to power we avoided the kind of Islamist regime that followed the fall of the Shah of Iran and that has provoked three decades of serious confrontation with the U.S. and totalitarian oppression of the Iranian people,” writes Hadley, implying a surprisingly good human rights situation under the Shah’s rule.

from LobeLog: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for January 28th, 2011:

The Atlantic: Jeffrey Goldberg lists his observations on the ongoing events in Egypt and mentions that friends of his, like FDD fellow Reuel Marc Gerecht, advocate that democratically elected Islamist governments might be part of a “long-term process of gradual modernization.” But Goldberg is “not so sure” and suggests that not all democratically elected governments are worth ending “fifty years of peace” which have “meant propping up dictators for fifty years.” “I support democratization, but the democratization we saw in Gaza (courtesy of, among others, Condi Rice) doesn’t seem particularly worth it,” he writes.” Goldberg then tries to deny the importance of “linkage”—despite its embrace by the military establishment and the Obama administration—and concludes, “these uprisings are offering proof that Israel isn’t the central Arab preoccupation. Wikileaks showed us that Iran is the obsession of Arab leaders, and these mass demonstrations are showing us that the faults of Arab leaders are the actual obsession of Arab people.” (Jim Lobe and I took a closer look at those cables and found a very different message.)

The National Interest: Ben-Gurion University professor Benny Morris writes, “The regimes that have crumbled or appear to be on the verge of crumbling, are those linked to the West, and they are regimes characterized by a relatively soft authoritarianism, and are commonly perceived as weak, if not downright flabby, well past their prime.” He contrasts the end of Ben Ali’s rule and the escalating situation in Egypt with the suppression of protests by the Iranian government in 2009. “All of this stands in stark contrast to the Iranian regime’s successful suppression of last year’s street rebellion, triggered by the fraudulent elections that left President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad in power,” he writes. Morris concludes, “What is clear is that the West, as usual, is faring poorly among the Muslims of the Middle East, where real savagery—sadly—wins respect, and irresolution, a kick in the pants.”

from LobeLog: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for January 26th, 2011:

National Review Online: Foundation for Defense of Democracies President Clifford May writes about the controversy surrounding a scheduled screening of the Clarion Fund’s film, “Iranium,” which was postponed after “suspicious letters” were received and the Iranian embassy complained. May points out that “it’s worth recalling that the Islamic Republic has a long history of attempting to enforce its will extraterritorially.” On Western engagement with Iran, May, who is interviewed in the film, observes, “diplomacy, outreach, engagement, and carefully crafted speeches showing respect and apologizing for “grievances” will have limited utility.” He concludes, “No sensible, rational person can watch this film, hear this evidence, and fail to come to the conclusion that the fanatics who rule Iran must be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them.”

Commentary: Alana Goodman blogs on Commentary’s Contentions blog that, according to the Times of London, Iranian Press TV has had its British bank account frozen. Goodman concludes her post, “The fake news station not only devotes itself to publishing constant anti-American and anti-Israel propaganda; it’s also issued news reports denying the Holocaust and claiming that the Mossad helped commit the 9/11 attacks. At the very least, the government should require the station to provide a content warning informing viewers that it’s funded entirely by the Iranian government.”

from LobeLog: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for January 26th, 2011:

The Washington Times: American Enterprise Institute fellow and former UN ambassador John Bolton denounces the EU and White House’s commitment to P5+1 negotiations with Iran, writing, “There is not, and has not been from the outset of these tortuous negotiations, even the slightest chance Iran will renounce its 20-year goal of deliverable nuclear weapons.” Bolton goes on to argue, “…the Tehran regime has systematically used the talks to buy time to overcome the many scientific and technological obstacles to achieving its objective.”

The Washington Post: Jennifer Rubin, writing on her Right Turn blog, opines on the retirement of Stuart Levey from his position as Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence. Rubin uses this event as an opportunity to review the state of Iran sanctions, writing, “One sanctions expert reminds me that sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran have still not been issued, and no foreign, non-Iranian bank has been sanctioned for its involvement with Iran.” Rubin concludes, “…[n]ow we see that sanctions critics were right all along. Even the best sanctions efforts innovatively implemented have failed to meet our objectives. We need to change the regime, not the rulers’ hearts and minds.”