Part of this article has been published in Washington Post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2007/10/25/AR2007102502216.html?sub=new
Dollar Democracy
Akbar Ganji-
Iran and the West need to have friendly and peaceful relations. But, at present, everyone is more than ever faced with the threat of war. In order to prevent war, there are things that need to be done. Peace is a product of democracy. Despotic states are furtive and untrustworthy. The Iranian people want to have a secular, democratic state that is committed to freedom and human rights. If Iran had a democratic state, the West would no longer need to fear the Iranian government. Iran’s current fundamentalist state is a dangerous state; but it is dangerous for its own people, not for the US. We need freedom, democracy and peace; not war conditions and the constant dreading of a barrage of destructive US missiles. The seeds of democracy need fertile soil in order to grow. Iraq, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc. are fertile soil for fundamentalism. If free and fair elections were held in these countries now, fundamentalists would emerge victorious. Iran is the only country in the Middle East in which modern, democratic forces would win any free and fair elections. Transition to democracy through peaceful struggle is our current concern. But our problem is not just the fact that the Iranian regime suppresses civil society on the pretext of war, it is also the fact that the regime describes all its opponents as US stooges and mercenaries.Democratic Iranian forces’ opposition to the 75m-dollar US fund has generated a great deal of misunderstanding. So, we need to make it clear what we oppose and what we favour.1. Any government’s foreign policy is directed at fulfilling and safeguarding the country’s national interests. Any government provides financial aid to others based on its own interests. And those who receive this kind of aid naturally have to align themselves with the donor’s policies. The affiliation to the Iranian government of Lebanon’s Hezbollah, the Iraqi Islamic Supreme Council, and some Afghan groups is because they receive financial assistance and weapons from Iran. The US Administration also provides assistance of this kind to various countries and groups. The Iranian people do not want their democratic movement to be dependent on and affiliated to any foreign government.The US Administration’s foreign policy in Asia and Africa is (not unusually) dictated by US political and economic interests, not by concern for spreading democracy. Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and many other countries that have friendly ties with the US Administration are major violators of human rights and have despotic regimes. But the US Administration does not attach much importance to the violation of human rights in these countries and does not allocate budgets to make them democratic. The people of the Middle East see US foreign policy as biased support for the Israeli government, not as an effort to spread democracy.2. In view of the fact that many Iranian politicians in the last two centuries were steered by and in the pay of foreign embassies, the general disposition of Iranian intellectuals and opposition activists is anti-foreigner. When an Iranian receives money from a foreign government, he/she is shunned by the people and becomes ineffective. In Iran, anyone who accepts money from a foreign government is dubbed “a mercenary”. If the US Administration is striving to give official recognition to democratic Iranians, it should be aware that any Iranian who asks the US for money or takes money from it will not be “recognized” as a democrat by Iranians.3. The Iranian regime uses the 75m-dollar US fund as an excuse to accuse all its opponents of drawing on this fund. Although this is a big lie, this ploy has proved to be a relatively effective way of poisoning the public’s mind against the regime’s opponents. One of the reasons for the current regime’s staying power is Iranians’ opposition to and fear of foreigners.4. What if the US were to allocate a 1bn-dollar fund to spread democracy in Iran? Would it be possible to create a democratic state in another country (Iran) with this sum? The people who think that they can make democracies with dollars should submit a bill for the allocation of funds for transforming all despotic regimes into democracies. If dollars could create democracies, why did the US Administration send so many troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, and squander more than 500bn dollars?5. Iran’s democratic movement and civil institutions do need financial resources. But these resources must come from Iranian sources. If Iranians themselves do nothing to make the transition to democracy, democracy cannot be presented to them like a gift. Expatriate Iranians have worked hard and have made a big fortunate (amounting to some 600bn to 800bn dollars). They can help their country’s democratic movement and assist the transition to democracy by establishing a truly national medium (TV).6. Democracy has epistemic and social prerequisites. If these prerequisites exist, then, it is the turn of brave, freedom-loving individuals to make the transition to democracy possible through their struggles. Many of social prerequisites of democracy do exist in Iran now. But dollars cannot produce the brave, combative individuals who are prepared to pay the price of struggling for democracy.7. What has the 75m-dollar fund been spent on? On Radio Farda, VOA TV and US State Department activities. It makes no difference to us how much is allocated to these recipients. But even if one single dollar of this fund has been given to an Iranian group, why is this not publicized openly? In view of these facts, why do you describe this fund as a fund for supporting democracy in Iran? Why not call it a fund for Radio Farda, VOA TV and the State Department? This would also help dispel the idea that these media’s purpose is to overthrow the Iranian regime. At the same time, does Congress feel no need to make a clear assessment of whether or not this fund has assisted the progress of democracy in Iran so far?This is our request: In order to do away with any misunderstanding, approve a bill that totally bans the payment of any funds to Iranian opposition groups/individuals. The Iranian people’s democratic movement does not need handouts from foreign governments; it needs the moral support of the international community and condemnation, by the world, of the Iranian regime for its extensive and systematic violation of human rights. The United Nations’ ineffective Human Rights Council must also be made effective.So, what do we favour? The Iranian regime has closed down all independent media and is preventing the people from hearing any democratic voices. The Iranian government is using modern technology, which it has purchased from Western companies, to block many websites and to make it almost impossible for Iranians to use the Internet. The West has made profit at the Iranian people’s expense by selling this technology to the Iranian government. The Iranian regime’s extensive censorship and media hegemony has to be ruptured. If the Iranian people can learn about events via a 24-hour TV and have effective access to the Internet; and if they can hear and read open criticism of the regime’s policies and learn about alternative models of government, the regime will be forced to abandon its security-censorship apparatus. Giving funds to the opposition is one thing; allowing Iranians to have access to foreign media and accurate information is another thing altogether.