Engaging Iran on Human Rights
The Wall Street Journal
17-Aug-2009 (3 comments)

But a conversation about human rights would do just the opposite. Under such a plan, Mr. Obama would announce that recent developments in Iran have sparked such concern about the basic rights of the Iranian people that he is setting aside talks about the nuclear issue to focus on talks about civil rights. He would propose a framework in which the U.S. would offer incentives—such as the gradual lifting of sanctions—in exchange for concrete steps towards greater protection of Iranian basic rights. The idea is similar in principle to Sen. Henry ("Scoop") Jackson's push for introducing human rights as a component of our negotiations with the Soviet Union in the 1970s.

The effect on the political dynamics inside Iran would be profound. Ahmadinejad would face a clear choice: Accept the framework and risk providing Iranians with the very freedoms that could undermine his totalitarian regime; or, more likely, reject the framework and incur the wrath of Iran's democrats.

A majority of the Iranian people want greater protection for human rights and better relations with the West. Here would be an opportunity for them to have both. Proposing these talks would shine a spotlight on the fundamental thuggishness of the regime, whether Ahmadinejad agrees to them or not.

>>>
recommended by Fred

Share/Save/Bookmark

 
Shah Ghollam

Sassan, yet another democracy loving individual

by Shah Ghollam on

who can't stand an opposing view. Ironically these people claim to want democracy in Iran.

"You consistently waste your time with these asinine posts. After the rigged elections in June and the murdering and raping of men and women, nobody wants to hear this IRI propaganda garbage that you're always trying to pass as somehow in the interest of the Iranian nation. "

So be it! What is it to you that I am wsting my time?

"You IRI apologists are the dirtiest whores on the planet. "

Suppose you are right and I am serving IRI with a payroll. What does that make you as an Iranian? A Zionist appologist? At least I distinguish Khodi and Ajnabi!

 


Sassan

The House Hezbollahi

by Sassan on

has the temerity (and the porrooee) to reduce US senators, scholars and publishers to a bunch of "neocons," claiming that "These people's main wish is sar beh taneh Iranihaa nabaasheh... in fact these people hate Iran and anything Iranian." 

Are you talking about the Zionists here or your beloved IRI thugs, the ones who sign your blood-soaked paychecks? Nobody hates the Iranian people (and their true culture and heritage) more than the repugnant Islamic regime in Iran.

OUR FIRST AND FOREMOST ENEMY IS OUR RULERS IN IRAN!!!

NOT ISRAEL!

NOT AMERICA!

Are you listening, Islamist dude???

You consistently waste your time with these asinine posts. After the rigged elections in June and the murdering and raping of men and women, nobody wants to hear this IRI propaganda garbage that you're always trying to pass as somehow in the interest of the Iranian nation.

You're farting in the wind, nothing more.

Whether Iranian human rights causes bolster Israel's case against a nuclear IRI -- who freaking cares! -- as long as it improves the pathetic human rights situation in Iran, that's all that matters to us Iranians who love Iran and hate the IRI. That only bothers you Islamic goons and paid whores who are scared shitless of Israel.

You IRI apologists are the dirtiest whores on the planet.


Ostaad

Buyer beware...

by Ostaad on

True to form now that prospects of meaningful rapprochement between the US and Iran has started to see the light of day, Rupert Murdock's rag publishes another neo-con(man)'s article to change the subject by talking about something the neo-cons, AIPAC and their supporters, including this site's AIPAC tea-and-crumpet server, have historically used as a battering ram to make the world safe for Israeli Apartheid regime. The last thing the rag and the neo-cons who run and use it are interested in are the Iranian people's human rights. These people's main wish is sar beh taneh Iranihaa nabaasheh.

Senator Scoop Jackson was Richard Perle's and other neocon(men)'s hero because his anti-Soviet views and his close relations with the Zionists and Israel-firsters in the US were exploited by them to pressure the then USSR. Human rights have never been on this cabal's agenda, in fact these people hate Iran and anything Iranian because Iran has been the biggest thorn to their sides and the most immovable obstacle to their goal of keeping Israel's nuclear arsenal, which is aimed at every major population center in the ME and beyond, protected from international scrutiny and accountability. Senator Scoop Jackson was an elected condom that the Zionista used to achieve their hegemonic goals. Senator Scoop Jackson was the "non-Zionist" face the neo-cons could hide behind to further their support for the Apartheid regime, that's all. Now they seem to want to recycle the same rhetoric, but this time the American people are alert and they know what kind of con artists they are dealing with.

The Iranian people have demonstrated beyond the shadow of a doubt they are serious about their civil/human rights and they intend to have them restored whether the regime wants it or not.

Therefore, this change of tactics proposed by the neo-con(men) and their treacherous Israel-firsters is only a diversion and fig leave to keep the conflict alive, and the negotiations about something that does not need to "negotiate" about.

I'm wondering what caused a talking head for a notorious Zionist-run outfit that had depicted Iran's legal and open nuclear program as the most destabilizing threat to the world, to change his tune.
New sheet music from AIPAC, perhaps? 

Obama should lift ALL Zionist-supported and instigated sanctions on
Iran as soon as possible. Nothing worries the current regime more than
prospects have an economy in Iran that is integrated with the world
economy, and thus makes a non-government/Sepaah controlled market
economy possible.