Bijan A M

Bijan

Airtight sanction is just an expression with no real meaning. It means a more concerted effort for putting pressure on IRI, with more participation from Europe, Russia and China notably. Besides, it has nothing to do with us.

Sanctions, if applied, are for the goals of International community. Not for our goals. If in some cases, the outside pressure had some internal political results, it was because internal politics taking advantage of external pressure had a real and well defined REPRESENTATIVE. And organization. A leader. A spokesman.

As the things are in Iran and among Iranians abroad right now, there is practically no difference whether we discuss sanctions or yesterday football match, in neither case our output would have any effect. But of-course we love to talk about sanctions, intentionally fabricate a link from this undefined sanction to an undefined military strike... just to divert the attention from the need of a sound political alternative.

As I commented on Reza Pahlavi interview (perhaps deleted now) the problem of advocating airtight (whatever it is) or targeted and selective sanctions (again, whatever they may be) is that it doesn't concern us as long as we are not organized and with a single voice to push our struggle and our message in any circumstances, including a possible sanctions.

I agree with SamSam but I don't oppose dialogue. Again, this current dialogue, similar to any kind of sanction or other actions that U.S or the international community may adopt toward IRI, is what they do for THEIR interest. But in an international perspective, not as an Iranian and in a national perspective, I happen to agree with favoring this course of action as opposed to other options. This has nothing to do with us per se. As sanctions have nothing to do with us and our struggle to undo IRI.

The priority for us, as always, is to unite around a platform and organize. 

Bijan khan

lol! i don't think any shooting would be called for!

however, where i think you may be 'dreaming' is in any idea of there being oil sanctions against iran. iran is far too powerful at the moment because of the recent economic crisis coupled with a global addiction to oil, and any move on iran's oil would send prices sky high, hurting the whole world and causing another major recession.

Peace

I'm honored

I thought my blog was lost. A minute ago when I found out about additional posts on this blog, I was totally shocked.

 Many thanks for your presence Ms. Parsa. I certainly appreciate your point, but, in all honesty, we know that sanction or war will happen (unless, in the very unlikely chance that IRI will give up building nukes).

While I appreciate Capt_ayhab’s point about people rallying behind the government, I also believe (very strongly) that, if government’s ability to subsidize many of the ordinary peoples living needs is attacked the people will start questioning their government’s judgements. They will rise out in the streets and demand what they used to have. It will indirectly support the opposition to spread their message.

True, I cannot argue that sanction will have no impact on ordinary people’s lives. The challenge is, can we devise a sanction that:

1-is effectively enforceable

2-places most of the hardship on ruling government and not the people. Such as:

- freezing government officials’ foreign accounts.

- Restricting official’s travel around the world.

- Controlling the sale of oil by IRI by meeting the world’s demand through       increased production by friendly allies (i.e. dismantling OPEC).

I’m just thinking out loud. Who knows, next demonstration (under sanction) may bring 5 or 10 million people, young, old, male, female, labor, executive, or even Basiji and Pasdars on the streets demanding more freedom.

Many will call me naïve and dreamer, but, I believe the reaction to a sanction will be support for freedom.

Go ahead and shoot me.  

Bijan

My good man, we want sanctions to create what? . pressure on IRI and bring people out to chant "death to IRI"?, well they are already out. Lets not formulate a sanction that thru regime selective subsidy system will only weaken the people. The focus must be on smart sanctions as I passingly called cultural/political in relation to their treatment of Iranians. Some Examples;

1-Political ;Ban on Regime personnel appearances on any international forum be it academical/political/economical etc. Basicaly sanction regime hardcore members thru financial/political means so as to limit their freedom of movement along with their stollen wealth.

2-Cultural ; ban all regime assisted or regime produced works of art aka subtle ommatie propaganda such as in  media, cinema, music(ommatie style), visual art, book fairs...etc to be held outside Iran. As well deny entry to all regime supported boursieh Basijii student under grad & post grad/professors(regime theoricians) who under cover of education act as regime eyes and ears since In Iran today majority of students with government based scholarship are definitly part of the circle of trusted supporters of mullahs and the same goes in an even higher probability for Academic assistants/professors.

Finally; Bomb Iran, yes, but with info bombs thru dedicated servers & satelites that preach patriotic sermons 24/7 and encourage & enlighten the minds of citizens who are under daily ommatie propaganda. We need cultural & educational shock & awe not F15,s.

Once again I am gratefull to have patriots with big heart such as yours as my ham-mihan pal.

Cheers!!!  

Path of Kiaan Resurrection of True Iran Hoisting Drafshe Kaviaan //iranianidentity.blogspot.com //www.youtube.com/user/samsamsia

Bijan khan

interesting question. in general, sanctions have consistently failed to achieve stated objectives, and have led to war. it is likely that the unstated objective is to weaken a regime in anticipation of war. in this sense, they can work, but only as an undeclared declaration of war.

in my own lifetime, however, i have been witness - we all have, if we were paying attention! - to one single and highly successful application of sanctions. Since that experience, i have held the view that sanctions can work if they are globally popular. 

i am of course talking about the global campaign to boycott south african produce. despite being supported by the UN, this was not supported by any western powers that i can remember except perhaps for the smaller countries. its power came from popular support. people stopped buying south african products and boycotted companies that invested in the country. the UN and the Olympic Committee shunned apartheid south africa. most importantly, the boycott of south african products was hugely popular among the great majority of south africans, including many whites.

from that experience i have learned that it is possible to make sanctions work, peacefully and very effectively. the problem that you would have in the case of iran is that the country is not at all unpopular on a global level. on the contrary, iran is highly respected for her courage.

so i guess my answer to your particular question is: no, it cannot work in the case of iran. and it should not be promoted as it leads to war.

in any case, the tide is in the other direction: détente with the west is quite likely in the coming period, don't you think?

Peace

Mr. Bijan AM

Points many analyst been trying to make is that sanctions on Iran, asides from the catastrophic affect on common people and population, will work exactly the opposite of what it intends to do, and that is to weaken the regime.

The very first day that sanctions go in effect, they will start rallying the whole country behind themselves, just like the way they did either early on the Akhund uprising, and subsequently during the Iran-Iraq war. Not to mention the fact that sanctions that are being proposed are to curb the alleged nuclear ambition of the IR and not the violation of human rights.

IR should not be given this opportunity to strengthen its position on the backs of Iranian people AGAIN, and they should be left for the brave Iranians to be taken care of. We all are agree to the fact that IR's time is numbered. It is matter of When and not IF.

Best support Iranians need now is for Mr. Obama to link nuclear proliferation negotiations with human rights violations in Iran. However the question remains, do they even care about all those people who have been suffering in past 30 years?

Regards

-YT 

P/S Regret that you do not appreciate the tone of my post. That is how I feel, and I feel very strongly about it.

Anon111.2

That was really funny. Thanks for your sense of humor.

Capt_ayhab

Thanks for your clear definition of sanction as being prelude to war. If that is truly what it is and has no impact in motivating the masses against their brutal regime, then I agree with you. They have no value and only lead to prolonging the life of the same regime you are trying to get rid of. Q gave Cuba and NKorea as examples in support of that argument. Then may I very politely ask you how would you encourage the people to look beyond IRI and open their horizons to other alternatives. How do you empower the masses to stand up to their government's wrong doing?

BTW, sir, I didn’t appreciate the tone of your post.  Those who may not agree with every one of your beliefs do not automatically become vatan-foroush.

Have a good day

All indications point to

All indications point to one fact alone: The IRI is not interested in negotiation with the West.

Airtight sanctions

are sanctions that are packaged using this device:

//www.google.com/products/catalog?hl=en&source=hp&q=vacuum+packing+machine&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=3152583367889249291&ei=9pX5Sr6yDMiBngeqprmFDQ&sa=X&oi=product_catalog_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBoQ8wIwAA#ps-sellers

Bijan jAn, dome khar sezAie k**ne khar ast!

Bijan says: "PS. Kharmagas, you have posted this piece of crap so many times that
it’s not funny anymore. Stop making fool of yourself. Grow-up…"

Bijan jAn, as an AIPAC supporter your ideas of sanctions and "surgical attack" is not new to me ..... if not in your own blogs, in others, and as a commenter you have been parroting AIPAC's agenda over and over again. I therefore think your blog deserved not more than a piece of .... from me. As we say in Persian:

dome khar sezAie k**ne khar ast!

salaaaamat basheed!

Airtight Sanction = Prelude to invasion

Airtight sanction = Naval Blockade = prelude to war => Iraq =>  Iran

Airtight sanctions are designed to weaken the morale of the population. Soften the target country[so to speak] and set her up for attack.

Hitler tried to do it to UK during WWII in form of naval blockade. GW Bush did it to Iraq and we are seeing the devastation. Israel been doing it to Gaza Strip for years.

They all might seem different, but they all have one purpose in mind, to SOFTEN the target country before military invasion.

Final Equation: Anyone propagating airtight sanctions on his/her own country = Traitor = Vatan Forosh

-YT 

Bijan and craig

So as an Iranian who is against war, you oppose IRI's interference and
aggression in Lebanon and Israel/Palestine, right? Are you willing to
go on record stating that? Or do you only oppose war when it's IRI that
would be attacked? Does it make sense to you that IRI can commit acts
of aggression on other nations, but they should be prevented from
responding in kind?

Yes, I oppose IRI's inteference.  

MOOSIR va PIAZ:  I know you did not address me
directly but, please allow me to ask if you are suggesting that Obama
is also a warmonger? I thought his appeal to many Bush haters on this
site was his commitment to dialogue and diplomacy. Are you suggesting
that if diplomacy fails, it is Obama’s fault and not IRI’s?

If Obama drops the first bomb then he will be called a warmongerer whether you like it or not. As for dimplomacy failing. There are spoilers on both sides who do not want it to succeeed. But from what we can see today Obama has gone waymore than any other president could and would to reach out to the leadership in Tehran. If it fails then I'll blame it on IRI. 

All

Thanks for your posts. Before drawing your guns and shoot me by extracting a few words out of a sentence and totally misrepresenting my intent, please pay more attention? I have posed a sincere question that has been on my mind and have been lazy enough to not have researched many books to find an answer. So, please show some degree of tolerance and understanding.

Q: Sir, thank you for your civility and I very much appreciate your response. What you have pointed out has always been my concern that any kind of sanction may lead to even further solidifying the grip of the government. But, I keep on wondering if there is a different kind that might help people questioning their government and become more open minded about alternatives. If you say no, there is no such a thing, I will respect your answer with some weight. Thanks for your comment.

Esther:  Many thanks for your relevant post. I read the article you posted and found it quite informative. It leaves some hope for some kind of sanction that could pressures the government and helping the opposition spread their message.

Samsam Khan:  Good to hear from you my friend. Unfortunately I don’t know exactly how cultural sanction works (Shows you my degree of ignorance). But, I think technological sanctions against the tools of intelligent services of IRI could be a great help. For example stopping Nokia, or Siemens from supporting the “deep packet” spying technology that they sold to IRI.  Cheers.

MOOSIR va PIAZ:  I know you did not address me directly but, please allow me to ask if you are suggesting that Obama is also a warmonger? I thought his appeal to many Bush haters on this site was his commitment to dialogue and diplomacy. Are you suggesting that if diplomacy fails, it is Obama’s fault and not IRI’s?

You all have a great day.

PS. Kharmagas, you have posted this piece of crap so many times that it’s not funny anymore. Stop making fool of yourself. Grow-up…

MOOSIRvaPIAZ

So as an Iranian who is against war, you oppose IRI's interference and aggression in Lebanon and Israel/Palestine, right? Are you willing to go on record stating that? Or do you only oppose war when it's IRI that would be attacked? Does it make sense to you that IRI can commit acts of aggression on other nations, but they should be prevented from responding in kind?

You have any evidence

You have any evidence to suggest that "dialogue" can resolve either of those issues?  

It does not matter if I do. As an Iranian who has Iranian interests at heart I will always be against sanctions/war regardless of whether dialogue works or not.

MOOSIRvaPIAZ

When there is no dialogue, how do you expect them to find a solution to IRI's nuclear issue? Or the IRI's influence in Lebonon/Gaza?

You have any evidence to suggest that "dialogue" can resolve either of those issues?  

The only thing they can do other than dialogue is to sanction and then go to
war.

Yes. War is coming if IRI proceeds down those two paths. And, IRI is proceeding down those two paths. How could it go any other way? I don't think the IRI wants war, myself, but I do think they cannot and will not change direction on those two issues (regardless of how much talking gets done) because the revolutionary ideology of the IRI requires them to continue with the militancy and the aggression. So in the meantime they engage in brinksmanship and see how far they can push without provoking an actual military response against IRI (rather than a response on an expendable proxy like Lebanon). One of these days, they will go too far. It's inevitable.

SamSamIIII

Here is where you show your lack of understanding of world issues. When there is no dialogue, how do you expect them to find a solution to IRI's nuclear issue? Or the IRI's influence in Lebonon/Gaza? The only thing they can do other than dialogue is to sanction and then go to war.

Airtight, smart sanctions, smart bombs, etc

They are all NewSpeak words. Sanctions or bombs can only be as tight or smart as the people who use them. That should say it all.

Bijan jaan

 Patriots view, as follows;

No war,             No sanctions                   No Dialogue

Regime pimps & Mozdoors wont agree with the 3rd part(Dialogue) va oonjast keh khodeshoono lo midan since thats the most important part not to legitimize the Qadesii regime. btw* I,m for political/cultural sanction on regime personnel. Economic sanction is nothing but a joke that will solidify the regime hezbollah base on the expence of average folks who will pay the brunt of the price via regime selective subsidies , get it? we want their base immoralized and average folks mobilized and not the other way around . Now, mind you internal oil strikes if  done by Iranian industrial workers(Oil,petro, chemical) inside Iran will help topple the regime only if it,s executed in right timing or will be just another blind reaction bound to fail.

Cheers pal!!!

Path of Kiaan Resurrection of True Iran Hoisting Drafshe Kaviaan //iranianidentity.blogspot.com //www.youtube.com/user/samsamsia

not "airtight" (to Bijan)

Bijan, not sure what "airtight" means, but not "airtight" means:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyA9sPJIFhA

HTH

Dear Bijan,

It is always very easy to live outside of Iran and tell the people and other countries what to do and what not to do. If you are so eager to have democracy in Iran with any price (which BTW is not paid by YOU), the first thing to do is to go back to Iran and fight along side of your own people against the IRI!! Be ghole maroof biroon vastAdi migi lengesh kon? BabA ajab marde honarmandi!!

Here is one of the facts about a recent Airtight sanctions against Saddam: (BTW, at the end the AIRTIGHT SANCTIONS didn't work and Bush attacked Iraq, which is another story for itself)

- 500,000 dead children because of Child Malnutrition and Mortality in Iraq, because of Sanctions!

And while your booking your ticket to Tehran watch this:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC-q3houri4

And the people said ...

First, I would like to note that I am not Iranian, and I claim no expertise or opinion on this subject.

Second, I would like to note that on Nov. 6, the New York Times (//www.nytimes.com/2009/11/06/opinion/06iht-ed...) reported,

"But many in the Green Movement respond that experience has shown that
Mr. Ahmadinejad is neither willing nor able to change course. Instead,
they would like to see the international community exert pressure on
the regime through a progressive set of smart, vigorous and targeted
sanctions and more forceful advocacy of human rights."

I don't know who "many in the Green Movement" are.  But they would seem to suggest that "airtightness" aside, "a progressive set of smart, vigorous and targeted sanctions" could be considered.

You can't hurt people into submission

History has proven that.

Sanctions will always be passed down to the people. Sanctions haven't done jack in North Korea and Cuba, in fact they have made those countries close up and be more isolationist.

Once again, I have to praise you for the great "sacrifice" YOU are willing to make by saying "sanctions are OK if they do X or Y". However, you don't speak for 75M Iranians.

End of story.

what is wrong with you people.

why is it that we need others to help us get democratic?. The only country in the world that would like to see Iran democratic is not on the map yet. They are all after our resources. Sanction is only going to stop the people (you see in the streets yeling and demanding freedom) from comming out. How do you expect them to come out if they had no food to eat. Democracy is not granted by super powers. Democracy is the right of any country to have, and we must create democracy. lets pull up our sleeves and create one, if you have the burning desire.

We have learned our lesson from the past, when we (IRANIANS) make our democracy this time, no one, but no one will dare try to take it away.  

"airtight sanction means

it's so tight that no air could get in or out and nobody could fart any more."

Forgive me Bijan

you say: " “is it worth it?”. I say yes, "

I must ask, who are you?

On whose behalf do you "say yes" ?