Iran could be in the throes of genuine change. So naturally, many are considering how President Obama should act. Should he react with outrage to the crackdowns? Should he have questioned the Iranian regime’s legitimacy earlier?
I think Obama’s reaction has been about right. Many conservatives such as Lindsay Graham and John McCain would have liked Obama to take a tougher line. Perhaps Obama could have been more outspoken in support of the protesters early on. But I think keeping a moderate tone was the correct move in this situation.
As he referenced in his Cairo speech, the US has a trouble relationship with Iran. Many Iranians are still upset about US support for the Shah. If the American President were to play a visible role in favor of the protesters, the Iranian regime would be able to paint the all the dissidents as Americans stooges. Given the animosity many Iranians have for the US, that could hinder reformers.
Moreover, the US needs to be able to deal with whatever regime emerges in Iran. If the current regime does prevail—as it seems it will—it would be bad to further alienate it, or give it an excuse to stop all negotiations. Granted, the regime is obstinate and may not work with us, but I would prefer not to foreclose all possibility of such engagement.
Lastly, it is not clear what taking a combative tone would do. Intervening militarily on behalf of the protesters will not happen. There’s no sense in making promises that can’t be kept.
No comments:
Post a Comment