Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (26802)	1/28/2004 7:17:07 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793912

Post Editorial Watching Iran's Coup Wednesday, January 28, 2004; Page A20 EUROPEAN GOVERNMENTS lately have been congratulating themselves for what they see as a turn toward moderation by the Iranian government, which has agreed to more stringent international inspections of its nuclear program. There is talk of a renewed political dialogue between Washington and Tehran, too: After an earthquake devastated the city of Bam late last month the administration considered dispatching a relief delegation headed by Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-N.C.). Such steps are hardly unprecedented -- Iran and Western governments have been flirting with rapprochement sporadically for years. What's remarkable is that the latest effort is developing at a moment when Iran's conservative clergy is engaged in an aggressive campaign to destroy, once and for all, the country's democratic reform movement. Before proceeding, the United States and Europe ought to draw the right conclusions from that political struggle. The crisis began earlier this month when a clerical body, the Guardian Council, banned nearly 4,000 candidates for next month's elections, including more than 80 incumbent members of parliament. The council's aim was to prevent a repeat of the 2000 elections, in which democratic reformers won a parliamentary majority. By rigging this election, the mullahs would prepare the way for replacing Iran's reformist president, Mohammad Khatami, with a conservative next year. Khatami and his parliamentary allies already have failed to push through reforms of the Iranian political system; most of their legislation has been vetoed by the Guardian Council. The electoral manipulation could demolish what is left of the movement, leaving Iran's government entirely in the hands of hard-liners. Although they cultivated Mr. Khatami for years, European governments appear ready to accept this development. Hassan Rowhani, the hard-liner who has begun speaking for Iran on subjects such as nuclear inspections, was received in Paris last week by French President Jacques Chirac, even while the reformist parliamentarians were engaged in a sit-in to protest their banishment. The Bush administration, too, may be tempted to overlook the eclipse of Mr. Khatami. The White House has tended to discount his party in favor of the more radical youth movement that, it is hoped, might eventually bring revolutionary regime change to Iran. Some officials argue that Iran's hard-liners are at least as interested as Mr. Khatami in striking a deal with the West -- and more able to deliver on their promises. It would be a mistake, however, to ignore a conservative coup. Iran's mullahs, authors of its continuing sponsorship of terrorism, should not be the beneficiaries of Western political approval, much less favors in trade and technology. It's not only that their pledges of a nuclear freeze would lack credibility. The larger problem is that Iran's ruling clergy is now so deeply unpopular among its own people that its ability to monopolize power for long is doubtful. Perhaps in recognition of this weakness, the clergy have recently reversed the ban on some parliamentary candidates and hinted at further compromise. Whatever the outcome of the crisis, however, the West's interest lies in standing with Iran's pro-democracy majority -- even if that means an end to the latest diplomatic thaw.