Features

Preechr · #1

Quote:

For too long, Washington has thought that a policy of coercion and sanctions applied to Iran would eventually yield a responsible and representative regime. Events in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe suggest that containment eventually generates sufficient pressure to force autocratic elites to accommodate both international mandates and the aspirations of their restless constituents. Ironically, though, U.S. policy has buttressed the Iranian regime, which has justified its monopoly of power as a means of fending off external enemies and managing an economy under international duress.

More than sanctions or threats of military retribution, Iran's integration into the global economy would impose standards and discipline on the recalcitrant theocracy. International investors and institutions such as the World Trade Organization are far more subversive, as they would demand the prerequisites of a democratic society -- transparency, the rule of law and decentralization -- as a price for their commerce.

Paradoxically, to liberalize the theocratic state, the United States would do better to shelve its containment strategy and embark on a policy of unconditional dialogue and sanctions relief. A reduced American threat would deprive the hard-liners of the conflict they need to justify their concentration of power. In the meantime, as Iran became assimilated into the global economy, the regime's influence would inevitably yield to the private sector, with its demands for accountability and reform.

FartinMowler · #2

I agree...

Abcdxxxx · #3

You're dreaming.

Has the the global economy imposed standards, law, or decentralization to Saudia Arabia's theocracy? Seems to me it's worked the opposite.

KevinTheOmnivore · #4

I see nothing wrong with seeking alternatives to war.

And actually, isn't the Saudi economy pretty stagnant, heavily influenced by the state?

Abcdxxxx · #5

I believe their free economy is on the rise, since joinging the WTO, but more to my point - their fundamentalist theocratic hold is as strong as ever.

I agree, there must be a better method for dealing with Iran...but this bullshit notion that you need to give Iran a nuclear bomb in order to weaken their oppressive leadership in order to diminish their hardline stance has no basis in reality. This isn't the Cold War, and those comparisons are simple minded, and play to this new rationalization of the month, which say's we're all supposed to pretend these nations are working off political ideologies rather then politicized religious ideologies.

The dream of a Caliphate isn't going to vanish with free trade, nuclear energy, and a basket full of roses. Iran have come to realize they may made a mistake. There is great doubt in the current state of the Islamic Revolution. Ahmadinejad got himself elected in great part by promising petroleum income to his people, but he can't deliver. Why should we bail him out and aid him in fullfilling that promise? Inflattion is out of control. Unemployment is out of control. Iranians are pissed HezbAllah keep getting big fat checks. What's the point of pretending their economic growth will lead to moderation, and peace when they have a self defeating President who called their stock market gambling, forbidden by Islamic law.

Johnnie · #6

Waging war on Iran would only cause theocratic ideologies to strenghten. Sadly, It seems to be the only way to defuse the atomic threat when there is an extremist (not necessarily oppressive) on command. Israel has already started to prepare itself by taking lesson from the recent Hizballah war. They have changed the army commander.

Quote:

What's the point of pretending their economic growth will lead to moderation, and peace when they have a self defeating President who called their stock market gambling, forbidden by Islamic law.

That's a great point. Saudi Arabia's economic growth hasn't weakened the theocratic influence in their government.