[lbo-talk] Regime Change and Paranoid Reaction

Yoshie Furuhashi critical.montages at gmail.com
Tue May 22 05:05:57 PDT 2007


Extricated from the irrelevant story of an "academic boycott of Iran," the case of Haleh Esfandiari* should call attention to the importance of putting ourselves on record against, and doing what we can do to stop, the United States government's open efforts to promote regime change in Iran as well as in other countries in the name of promotion of democracy, not just opposing war and other more widely recognized evils. To my knowledge, there is no evidence that Esfandiari is involved in any activity that directly promotes regime change. But it is true that the US government is officially committed to doing so, for instance, allocating at least $75 million, and NGOs have been involved in regime change in a number of countries.** Governments in many places outside the West have taken various actions, from sensible to paranoid***, against US government agencies, NGOs, and others that either actually have or are suspected of having links to regime change campaigns.

The Middle East Studies Association's letter of protest to the government of Iran, telling it to "grant her [Esfandiari] access to legal counsel and family members, and allow her to return to her family in the United States as quickly as possible," is not unwelcome.

It would be better, though, if the MESA, as well as other scholarly organizations like it, also protested so-called "democracy assistance" conducted to further US geopolitical designs, not just with regard to Iran but across the board. No academic organization has come out against that yet.

* <http://www2.irna.com/en/news/view/line-22/0705220331013754.htm> Today: Tuesday May 22, 2007 Intelligence Ministry elaborates on Esfandiari's arrest Tehran, May 22, IRNA

Intelligence Ministry-Esfandiari

Public Relations of IRI Intelligence Ministry here Monday elaborated on detainment of Haleh Esfandiari.

In Intelligence Ministry's communique, a copy of which was delivered to IRNA, we read, "Intelligence surveys on efforts made by certain US institutes, foundations, and organizations aimed at influencing the developments in the Islamic Republic of Iran reveled certain facts for us."

It adds, "The truth of the matter is that those bodies are under the umbrella of such titles as democracy, human rights, and...playing the role that their intelligence and information services used to play against countries in question in the past."

The Intelligence Ministry announced, "Regarding Mrs. Haleh Esfandiari, too, we point out that she is the head and founder of the Middle East Program of Wilson Center in the United States, whose budget is allocated by the US Congress."

"That center is the connection ring between the Iranians and the US organizations and foundations whose main objective is fortifying the social trends that act in line with the interests of the aliens. For instance, Ramin Jahanbeglou, who was one of the guests of this center, had been chosen by the NED Foundation, relying on the cooperation of other US foundations, theoretized the model of East Europe's collapse, matched it with the situation in Iran, and tried to pursue it as a project."

The Intelligence Ministry reiterated, "In conducted research Mrs. Esfandiari has pointed out that the center's activities and programs related to Iran were sponsored and financed by the famous Soros oundation, that is a US foundation owned by George Soros that has played key roles in intrigues that have led to colorful revolutions in former USSR republics in recent years."

The Ministry's Public Relations has furthermore stressed, "Relying on cooperation of Mrs. Esfandiari the head and representative of the US based Soros Foundation in Iran was identified and an arrest warrant was issued for him, the complementary research about the matter still continues."

The Intelligence Ministry announced, "In primary interrogations, she reiterated that Soros Foundation has established an unofficial network with the potential of future broader expansion, whose main objective is overthrowing the system."

According to those elaborations, some of those foundations send invitations to Iranian thinkers to give lectures, participate at seminars, or to present research projects, allocating budgets to such activities... trying to choose active partners in our country and link them to the decision maker circles and organization in the United States.

"In this respect the unseen key role played by certain intelligence agents and undercover officials in pushing forth the objectives of such projects is to be noted."

The Intelligence Ministry reiterates, "Although the short term objectives of the above mentioned foundations are mainly lined to their apparent activities, their mid-term objectives include a type of culture making, foundation making, and network establishment in the country, and their expansion in the long run, that is seriously pursued."

At the end, the Intelligence Ministry points out, "The ultimate goal of those foundations, too, is to fortify those networks at fields that are of interest for them and reaping the fruits of such activities in due time, that is nothing but people's confrontation with the system. This US designed model with its hallucinating and chanting sign is aimed at soft overthrowing of the system." 2329/1771

<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/21/AR2007052100774_pf.html> American Scholar Is Charged in Iran Tehran Accuses Her Of Seeking to Topple Ruling Establishment By Robin Wright Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, May 22, 2007; A08

<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/22/world/middleeast/22iran.html> May 22, 2007 Iran Accuses American of Revolution Plot By NEIL MacFARQUHAR

<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/21/AR2007052101180.html> Iran see "soft revolution" in U.S. academic's work Reuters Monday, May 21, 2007; 5:48 PM

** The best known recent examples are the USG and its allied NGOs' activities in post-Soviet Eastern Europe:

<http://www.monthlyreview.org/1206sussman.htm> The Myths of 'Democracy Assistance': U.S. Political Intervention in Post-Soviet Eastern Europe by Gerald Sussman

We are at present working discreetly with all our might

to wrest this mysterious force called sovereignty out of

the clutches of the local nation states of the world.

-- Arnold Toynbee, 1931

One of the notable shifts in post-Soviet world politics is the almost unimpeded involvement of Western agents, consultants, and public and private institutions in the management of national election processes around the world—including those in the former Soviet allied states. As communist party apparatuses in those countries began to collapse by the late 1980s and in almost bloodless fashion gave way to emerging political forces, the West, especially the United States, was quick to intercede in their political and economic affairs. The methods of manipulating foreign elections have been modified since the heyday of CIA cloak and dagger operations, but the general objectives of imperial rule are unchanged. Today, the U.S. government relies less on the CIA in most cases and more on the relatively transparent initiatives undertaken by such public and private organizations as the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Freedom House, George Soros's Open Society, and a network of other well-financed globetrotting public and private professional political organizations, primarily American, operating in the service of the state's parallel neoliberal economic and political objectives. Allen Weinstein, who helped establish NED, noted: "A lot of what we [NED] do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA."1

*** Iran's history explains the paranoid streak. For that, see Ervand Abrahamian, Khomeinism: Essays on the Islamic Republic (Berkeley: University of California, 1993, <http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft6c6006wp/>):

The British, determined to undermine Mosaddeq from

the day he was elected premier, refused to negotiate

seriously with him.

For instance, Professor [Ann] Lambton, serving as a

Foreign Office consultant, advised as early as November

1951 that the British government should persevere in

"undermining" Mosaddeq, refuse to reach agreement with

him, and reject American attempts to find a compromise

solution. "The Americans," she insisted, "do not have the

experience or the psychological insight to understand

Persia."[32]

The central figure in the British strategy to overthrow

Mosaddeq was another academic, Robin Zaehner, who

soon became professor of Eastern religions and ethics at

Oxford. As press attaché in Tehran during 1943-47,

Zaehner had befriended numerous politicians, especially

through opium-smoking parties. Dispatched back to Iran

by MI6, Zaehner actively searched for a suitable general

to carry out the planned coup.[33] He also used diverse

channels to undermine Mosaddeq: Sayyid Ziya and the

pro-British politicians; newspaper editors up for sale;

conservative aristocrats who in the past had sided with

Russia and America; tribal chiefs, notably the Bakhtiyaris;

army officers, shady businessmen, courtiers, and members

of the royal family, many of whom outstripped the shah in

their fear of Mosaddeq. Helped in due course by the CIA,

Zaehner also wooed away a number of Mosaddeq's

associates, including Ayatollah Kashani, General Zahedi,

Hosayn Makki, and Mozaffar Baqai.[34] Baqai, a professor

of ethics at Tehran University, soon became notorious as

the man who abducted Mosaddeq's chief of police and

tortured him to death. MI6, together with the CIA, also

resorted to dirty tricks to undermine the government,

one of the more harmless ones being the rumor that

"the communists are plotting against Mosaddeq's life and

placing the responsibility on the British."[35]

It is therefore not surprising that the 1953 coup gave rise

to conspiracy theories, including cloak and dagger stories of

Orientalist professors moonlighting as spies, forgers, and

even assassins. Reality -- in this case -- was stranger than

fiction. These conspiracy theories were compounded by

the fact that some Western academics did their best to

expurgate from their publications any mention of the CIA

and MI6 in the 1953 coup. In fact, recent autobiographies

reveal that the shah often subsidized British and American

academics whose publications tended to reinforce the court

view of modern Iranian history, especially of the 1953 events.[36]

-- Yoshie



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list