Coming
Soon!
From Common Courage Press
Recent
Stories
July
21, 2003
Edward
Said
Imperial Arrogance and the Vile Stereotyping
of Arabs
Ron
Jacobs
Shut Up and Shoot
Allan J.
Lichtman
Why is George Bush President?
Elaine
Cassel
How's the Occupation Going? Ask the People of Iraq
Christopher
Brauchli
History Recapitulates: Guantanamo and the Japanese Internment
Camps
Bruce
Jackson
Third and Arizona, Santa Monica
Website
of the Day
John Dean: Taking Apart Bush's State of the Union Speech, Claim
by Claim
July
19 / 20, 2003
Arthur
Mitzman
Will the Pax Americana be More Sustainable
Than the Dot.com Bubble?
Julian
Bond
We Shall be Heard
Cynthia
McKinney
Bush's Racial Politics at Home and Abroad
Mel
Goodman
What is to be Done with the CIA?
Jason Leopold
Tenet Blames Wolfowitz
Mickey
Z.
History Forgave Churchill
Doug Giebel
Impeachment as the Message
Jon
Brown
Whipping the Post
Mano Singham
Cheney's Oil Maps
Steven
Sherman
Nickle, Dimed and Slimed at UNC
Robin Philpot
Liberia: History Doesn't Repeat Itself, It Stutters
Khaldoun
Khelil
Capturing Friedman
Jeffrey
St. Clair
You Must Leave Home, Again: Gilad Atzmon's A Guide to the Perplexed
Lenni
Brenner
Sitting in with Mingus
Vanessa
Jones
Three Dog Night
Adam
Engel
Video Judas Video
Poets'
Basement
Foley, Smith and Curtis
Website
of the Weekend
Illegal Art
July
18, 2003
David
Vest
Drowning in Deep Doo-Doo
Rahul
Mahajan
Deceit Runs Deep
John Chuckman
Enron-style Management in a Dangerous World
Harold
A. Gould
The Bush-Musharraf Conclave
Alvaro
Angarita
In the Eye of the Storm: Colombia's War on Journalists
David
Grenier
Sovereignty and Solidarity in Indian Country...Rhode Island
Dave Lindorff
Bush and Hitler: a Response to the Wall Street Journal
Website
of the Day
Murder of a Whistleblower? Timeline in David Kelly Affair
July
17, 2003
Ron
Jacobs
Sometimes Even the President of the
United States Has to Stand Naked
Lisa
Walsh Thomas
Bush Country: the Venom and Adulation of Ignorance
Martin
Schwarz
Bush Pre-emptive Strike Doctrine is the Bane of Non-Proliferation
Watchdogs
Heidi
Lypps
Better Justice Through Chemistry? Forced
Drugging and the Supreme Court
Norman
Madarasz
Third Ways and Third Worlds: Lula at the Progressive Governance
Conference
Pankaj
Mehta
Criminalizing the Palestinian Solidarity Movement
Marjorie
Cohn
Bush, War Lies & Impeachment: the
Boy Who Cried Wolf
Hammond
Guthrie
(Dis) Intelligence Revisited
Website
of the Day
No Force, No Fraud: the Soul of Libertarianism
July
16, 2003
Jason
Leopold
Wolfowitz Told White House to Hype
Dubious Uranium Claims
William
Cook
Defining Terrorism from the Top Down
Elaine
Cassel
Judge Brinkema v. Ashcroft: She Whom
Must Not Be Obeyed
Jason
Leopold
How Can They Justify the War If WMDs Are Never Found?
Linda Heard
Bondage or Freedom?
Raymond
Barrett
From Detroit to Basra
Jeffrey
St. Clair
Back to the Future in Guatemala:
The Return of Gen. Ríos Montt
July
15, 2003
Kathleen
and Bill Christison
Why We Resigned from VIPS
Elaine
Cassel
Ashcroft's War on Legal Whistleblowers:
the Ordeal of Jesselyn Radack
Chris
Floyd
Barge Poles: Oil Wars and New Europe's Mercenaries
Jason
Leopold
CIA Warned White House Last October that Niger Docs were Forgeries
Gaius Publius
Considering the Obvious: Fool Us Once, Fool Us Twise...Please
John
Troyer
The Niger Syndrome
Becky Gillette
No Conspiracy at Coffeen Nature Preserve: a Response to David
Orrr
Uri
Avnery
The Bi-National State: The Wolf Shall
Dwell with the Lamb
Website
of the Day
Cost of Iraq War
July
14, 2003
Lisa
Taraki
Hot Days in Ramallah
Walter
Brasch
Bush: the Pretend Captain
SOA
Watch
Training Colombia's Killers in the US
Dan Bacher
Yurok Tribe Denounces Klamath River Salmon Killers
Veteran
Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
Intelligence Unglued
Website
of the Day
Coalition for Democratic Rights and Civil Liberties
July 12 / 13, 2003
Arthur
Mitzman
The Double Wall Before the Future
Standard
Schaefer
The Coming Financial Reality: an
Interview with Michael Hudson
John Feffer
A Fearful Symmetry: Washington and Pyongyang
Ron
Jacobs
Shades of Gray in Iran
Elaine
Cassel
Judicial Terrorism Against the Bill of Rights
Tom
Stephens
Civil Liberties After 9/11
David Lindorff
New White House Slogan: "Case Closed. Just Move On"
Jason
Leopold
The Mini-War Against Iraq Prior to 9/11
Lee Sustar
What's Behind the Crisis in Liberia?
Mickey
Z.
AIDS Dissent and Africa
Sam Hamod
Semitic is a Language Group, Not a Race or Ethnic Group
Ramzy
Baroud
Awaiting Justice on an Old Blanket
Jeffrey
St. Clair
Savage Incongruities: the Photographic Life of Lee Miller
Adam
Engel
Parable of the Lobbyist
Robert
Sanders
A Review of Ralph Lopez's American Dream
Poets'
Basement
Albert, Witherup, Guthrie
July
11, 2003
Conn
Hallinan
The Coin of Empire
Tim
Wise
God Responds to Bush
Mokhiber
/ Weissman
The Two Faces of Bush in Africa
Edward
S. Herman
Whitewashing Sandra Day O'Connor
David Orr
Coffeen-gate: What's Going on at the Sierra Club Foundation?
David
Lindorff
An Iraq War & Occupation Glossary
Website
of the Day
Dead Malls
July
10, 2003
Ron
Jacobs
Dealing with the Devil: the Bloody
Profits of General Dynamics
Sean
Donahue
Bush and the Paramillitaries: Coddling Terrorists in Colombia
Yemi
Toure
Who Outted Bush in Afrika?
Robert
Jensen
Politics and Sustainability: an Interview
with Wes Jackson
Ali
Abunimah
US Leaves Injured Iraqis Untreated
Joanne
Mariner
Federal Courts, Not Military Commissions
Website
of the Day
Electronic Iraq
July
9, 2003
David
Lindorff
Is the Media Finally Turning on
Bush?
David
Krieger and Angela McCracken
10 Myths About Nuclear Weapons
Mickey
Z.
Why Speak Out?
Lee Sustar
The Great Medicare Fraud
John
Chuckman
The Worst Kind of Lie
Gary Leupp
"Pacifist" Japan and the Occupation of Iraq
Website
of the Day
Hail to the Thief:
Songs for the Bush Years
July
8, 2003
Elaine
Cassel
Bully on the Bench: the Pathological
Dissents of Scalia
Alan
Maass
Nights of Fire and Rage in Benton Harbor
Chris
Floyd
Troubled Sleep: Getting Used to the American Gulag
Linda
S. Heard
America's Kangaroo Justice
Brian
Cloughley
They Tell Lies to Nodders
Charles
Sullivan
Bush the Christian?
Saul
Landau
The Intelligence Culture in the National Security Age
Website
of the Day
Occupation Watch
July
7, 2003
William
Blum
The Anti-Empire Report
Harvey
Wasserman
The Nuke with a Hole in Its Head
Ramzy
Baroud
Peace for All the Wrong Reasons
Simon
Jones
What Progressives Should Think About
Iran
Lesley
McCulloch
Fear, Pain and Shame in Aceh
Uri
Avnery
The Draw
Steve
Perry
Bush's Wars Web Log 7/3
July
4 / 6, 2003
Patrick
Cockburn
Dead on the Fourth of July
Frederick
Douglass
What is Freedom to a Slave?
Martha
Honey
Bush and Africa: Racism, Exploitation
and Neglect
Jeffrey
St. Clair
The Rat in the Grain: Amstutz and
the Looting of Iraqi Agriculture
Standard
Schaefer
Rule by Fed: Anyone But Greenspan in 2004
Lenni Brenner
Jefferson is for Today
Elaine
Cassel
Fucking Furious on the Fourth
Ben Tripp
How Free Are We?
Wayne
Madsen
A Sad Independence Day
John Stanton
Happy Birthday, America! 227 Years of War
Jim
Lobe
Bush's Surreal AIDS Appointment
John Blair
Return to Marble Hill: Indiana's Rusting Nuke
Lisa
Walsh Thomas
Heavy Reckoning at Qaim
David Vest
Wake Up and Smell the Dynamite
Adam
Engel
Queer as Grass
Poets'
Basement
Christian, Witherup, Albert & St. Clair
Website
of the Weekend
The Lipstick Librarian
Hot Stories
Wendell
Berry
Small Destructions Add Up
CounterPunch
Wire
WMD: Who Said What When
Cindy
Corrie
A Mother's Day Talk: the Daughter
I Can't Hear From
Elaine
Cassel
Civil Liberties
Watch
Michel
Guerrin
Embedded Photographer Says: "I
Saw Marines Kill Civilians"
Uzma
Aslam Khan
The Unbearably Grim Aftermath of War:
What America Says Does Not Go
Paul de Rooij
Arrogant
Propaganda
Gore Vidal
The
Erosion of the American Dream
Francis Boyle
Impeach
Bush: A Draft Resolution
Click Here
for More Stories.
|
July
22, 2003
Dilemmas
for the Peace Movement?
Solidarity and
Student Protests in Iran
By JEREMY BRECHER
This June, vigilante forces attacked nonviolent
Iranian student protesters, charging them on motorcycles and
assaulting them with batons, chains, and knives. Instead of protecting
the students against the vigilante attacks, the Iranian government
threatened to punish the students severely and arrested over
4,000 people. A new round of protests scheduled for early July
was thwarted by a ban on meetings, the closing of university
dorms, and the kidnapping of three student leaders. Continuing
repression of the student movement, combined with deep popular
unrest, is likely to keep the Iranian conflict in the world spotlight.
Normally, the global peace movement and
political left would respond to repression by an authoritarian,
theocratic regime with outrage and protest. But so far there
has been a deafening silence. The reason is probably not that
peace activists don't care about democracy and human rights when
they are trampled by opponents of America. More likely there
is wariness about intervening in a complex, multiplayer drama
in which the left could have an impact contrary to what it intends.
The purpose of this essay is to promote the discussion needed
to help the movement see its way clear to a more forthright,
but responsible, response. Such a discussion may also help clarify
other situations in which the peace movement and the left must
respond to authoritarian regimes opposed to U.S. imperialism.
Iran has long had a strong and recurring
internal conflict between autocratic and democratic tendencies.
Its first constitutional movement forced the shah (monarch) to
accept an elected parliament nearly a century ago, and powerful
democratic movements have periodically arisen since that time.
In 1953, the National Front movement,
based in the urban middle class and led by Mohammad Mossadegh,
aspired to nationalize the British-controlled Anglo-Iranian Oil
Company. Newly elected U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower authorized
the CIA to cooperate with a British plan to overthrow the Mossadegh
government. The coup was successful, and the shah was established
as a virtual dictator. He froze out the democratic nationalist
elements that had backed Mossadegh and, with strong backing from
the U.S., ruled by tyranny, terror, and torture. The U.S. soon
succeeded in taking Iran's oil industry from the British. U.S.
policy designated Iran along with Israel as Washington's "surrogates"
for control of the Middle East.
A recently disclosed aspect of the CIA
operation is that it included unprecedented political mobilization
of the traditionalist, fundamentalist Shiite religious leaders
known as the mullahs. As Gabriel Kolko put it, the U.S. "eliminated
a secular, middle-class nationalism." As throughout the
Middle East, rebellion and discontent increasingly took on fundamentalist
Islamic forms and ideologies.
Resistance to the shah grew as the regime
become more and more repressive. In 1978 massive street demonstrations
led to bloody confrontations with the shah's police, and the
shah's peasant-based army soon disintegrated. The revolutionary
movement had many tendencies, but the religious leaders who had
first been politicized by the CIA ultimately won out. In 1979
the shah fled into exile, and Iran was declared an Islamic republic.
Though elections and some other democratic forms remained, the
mullahs possessed ultimate power and used mass executions, long
incarcerations, and vigilante violence to impose their will.
A New Generation
Over the course of the 1990s, a new Iranian
generation came of age that increasingly despised the repressiveness
and corruption of the theocratic regime and the poverty and isolation
to which it was consigning the country. A reformist movement
elected Mohammad Khatami as president. According to Human Rights
Watch, today
Iran is caught in a continuing power
struggle between elected reformers, who control both the presidency
and parliament, and clerical conservatives, who exercise authority
through various offices, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei, the judiciary and the Council of Guardians, and elements
of the security forces.
Many students and other Iranians have
lost faith in the nonconfrontational strategy of the elected
reformers. A quiet but carefully conducted poll in 2002 showed
broad opposition to the regime's policies.
The current protests, the latest in a
series, began with student opposition to a plan to charge tuition
at state-run universities. The protests spread to a dozen cities,
the demands deepened to include full democratization, and support
included many adult onlookers, who honked car horns in approval
of the student demonstrators. The movement is self-organized
and nonviolent and has wide public support.
The student movement's principal demand
is to eliminate the power of the self-perpetuating theocratic
elite over the Iranian government and to allow the elected government
to rule without the "guidance" of the mullahs and their
allies. One widely discussed method to accomplish this proposes
a referendum giving full authority to the elected government.
A Complex Picture
This situation appears to be a straightforward
confrontation of idealistic young democrats and repressive fundamentalist
authoritarians. But it is embedded in a context of geopolitical
manipulation that complicates the picture.
Over the last quarter century, every
U.S. administration has implacably opposed the Islamic Republic
in Iran. During the Iran-Iraq war, Washington even supported
Saddam Hussein as a bulwark against Iran. This is hardly because
the U.S. has sought a democratic Iran--it supported both the
mullahs and the shah at one time or another. Rather, it sees
Iran as a critical source of oil and a powerful country that
currently threatens--but could support--both U.S. and Israeli
interests.
Germany, France, Britain, and Russia
have taken advantage of U.S. isolation from Iran to develop ties
with the regime and to profit from its oil wealth. According
to the New York Times, France, for example, is "committed
to the stability of the Islamic Republic." Opportunistic
European support for the current Iranian regime has actually
led many of its opponents to consider the U.S. as their only
potential savior.
As part of its post-9/11 bluster, the
Bush administration declared Iran part of the "axis of evil"
and has made numerous threats against it. In order to amplify
those threats, the White House has seized on recent indications
that Iran is continuing its quest for nuclear weapons, which
was initiated by the shah. Washington has pressured the European
Union, Russia, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
to encourage Iran to accept tighter monitoring of its nuclear
programs.
Currently the Bush administration is
divided on its Iran policy. Mainstream conservatives in the State
Department have been inclined to support the official reform
movement, whereas neoconservatives in the Defense Department
see an opportunity to promote a pro-U.S. revolution in Iran.
The Bush administration has repeatedly
hinted that it might pursue an Iraq-style attack and occupation.
National Security adviser Condoleezza Rice, echoing threats that
preceded the U.S. attack on Iraq, recently spoke of a "'Made
in America' solution" if multilateral action does not produce
results. "Sometimes one has to fight wars to deal with tyrants,"
she warned. Notwithstanding such implicit threats, the problems
of managing the aftermath of a U.S. attack on Iran appear to
be an awesome deterrent.
President Bush recently praised the student
protests as "the beginning of people expressing themselves
toward a free Iran." This comes as U.S. troops regularly
censor the media and shoot down demonstrators next door in Iraq.
Although the Bush administration may wish to use student protest
to destabilize the situation in Iran, Washington is notorious
for promoting revolts that it is not then willing to buttress--witness
the U.S.-encouraged uprisings by Kurds and Shiites in Iraq after
the Gulf War that Saddam Hussein was allowed to suppress with
extreme brutality. So the White House is unlikely to have scruples
about cheering on the Iranian students to destruction. Encouraging
the student revolt is done in the interest of Washington's agenda,
which can not be accurately described as seeking freedom, independence,
and self-determination for the people of Iran.
The actual impact of Bush administration
destabilization efforts is difficult to evaluate. Bush's endorsement
of the student movement may already have helped hard-liners legitimate
their suppression of the students as necessary to guard against
"foreign forces." On the other hand, fear of foreign
intervention may also serve as a constraint. For example, after
the start of the student demonstrations, Supreme Leader Ayatollah
Ali Khamenei said on state television, "I call on the pious
and the [conservative cadres] not to intervene whenever they
see riots." Two days later, a right-wing militia pledged
not to take part in the street skirmishes.
Such restraint may lead some supporters
of democratization to see U.S. threats as a way to accelerate
reform. But that presumes that democratization really matters
to the Bush administration. In fact, the mullahs are less likely
to respond to U.S. threats by conceding democracy and human rights
to their citizens than by offering concessions suited to the
real Bush agenda--such as oil deals and a cooperative stance
regarding Iraq.
Dilemmas for the Peace
Movement
For the global peace movement and the
left, this situation presents several interlocking dilemmas.
How is it possible to promote human rights and democracy in Iran
without strengthening Washington's drive to dominate the world
in general and the Middle East in particular? How is it possible
to oppose European support for the Islamic Republic without undermining
the development of a much-needed united front for the containment
of U.S. aggression? How is it possible to encourage disarmament
and restrict the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction
while discouraging U.S. threats against Iran and other countries?
The problem is in some ways parallel
to that faced by the international peace movement in the 1980s,
when repression of nonviolent antiauthoritarian revolts in Poland
and elsewhere in Eastern Europe coincided with aggressive U.S.
military expansionism. At that time, the European Nuclear Disarmament
movement developed a sophisticated strategy that simultaneously
increased pressure for human rights in the East and demilitarization
in the West. Today we need to build democratic alternatives to
the tyranny of the mullahs, the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction, and the devastation that the U.S. has wreaked on
Afghanistan and Iraq and now threatens to visit on Iran.
The goal for the global antiwar movement
and the left should be a nonviolent transition to democracy in
Iran complete with human rights and freedom from domination by
outside powers. The movement should aim to empower the Iranian
people against the mullahs, the U.S., the EU, or anyone else
who would treat them as pawns for self-serving agendas.
Next Steps
The first step toward this goal is to
demand that the Iranian regime release all political prisoners,
regardless of their beliefs, and end the suppression of protesters'
human rights by its own agencies and those of vigilante groups.
There is also a clear need to support the peaceful struggle of
the Iranian people for democracy, including a referendum to decide
their own future. An important aspect here is the demand that
European countries and the EU end both tacit and active support
for the suppression of human rights and democracy by the Iranian
regime.
International support for human rights
played a major role in the democratization in Poland, Czechoslovakia,
and elsewhere in Eastern Europe. History indicates that outside
support for responsible government can have a substantial impact
in Iran as well. In 1996, a German court implicated Islamic Republic
leaders of assassinating their opponents in Berlin. Several European
countries then briefly cut diplomatic ties with the regime. The
ruling had a huge impact on Iranian opinion, contributing substantially
to the reformist President Khatami's landslide victory.
Support can take the form of action as
well as words. In Poland, labor and left activists bolstered
the Solidarity movement by smuggling in printing presses, fax
machines, photocopiers, and other means for mobilizing the public.
Satellite broadcasts are already playing a significant support
role for the Iranian movement. More direct contact, ranging from
solidarity delegations to the kind of volunteer human rights
observation and nonviolent intervention provided by the "Internationals"
in Palestine, would be difficult but appropriate. So would a
campaign for international human rights monitors.
Such an approach is almost the opposite
of a U.S. "liberation" that seeks to impose "democracy"
and "human rights" through war and occupation, along
the model of Afghanistan and Iraq. The international peace movement
should demand human rights and democratization in Iran alongside
its demands for an end to the U.S. occupation in Iraq and the
Israeli occupation in Palestine.
The left must also lay out an approach
to the problem of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that provides
an alternative to the selective Bush administration policy of
threatening to unilaterally "Saddamize" WMD-aspiring
states. A good starting point is to demand that all countries
support the Syrian-sponsored UN proposal to make the Middle East
a WMD-free zone. This would require the U.S. and other powers
to address the issue of Israeli nuclear weapons as part of discussions
about eliminating weapons of mass destruction. And in order for
any response to proliferation to be effective, the existing nuclear
powers would need to meet their responsibilities under the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty by moving promptly toward the elimination
of their own nuclear weapons. In such a context, specific demands
that Iran not build nuclear weapons and that it comply with IAEA
demands for answers to questions about its nuclear program are
appropriate. But such demands need to be combined with negotiations
to provide Iran with other means of security against military
attack.
Iran is only one of many countries that
appear to oppose the Bush administration's imperial juggernaut
but that also suppress the human rights of their own people.
It is always a temptation for the peace movement and the left
to soft-pedal our critique of such regimes out of a feeling that
"the enemy of my enemy is my friend." It is particularly
hard to find a balanced position when Washington is utilizing
the flaws of those regimes it opposes to justify aggression against
them while ignoring the equal or greater crimes of regimes it
supports.
Failure to defend human rights in such
circumstances only plays into the hands of the Bush juggernaut,
however. Perhaps the most effective Bush administration justification
for its aggression, especially with the media-manipulated American
people, is its claim that the U.S. overthrow of regimes like
those in Afghanistan and Iraq frees people from tyranny and establishes
human rights and democracy. Any movement to terminate the Bush
juggernaut shoots itself in the heart when it fails to identify
a better way for people to liberate themselves from oppression.
We can't afford to provide any justification for the charge that
we are the defenders of tyrants. Let us instead be known as people
whose fundamental solidarity is not with one or another government
but with all people who are struggling for liberation from oppression.
Jeremy Brecher
is a historian and the author of twelve books including STRIKE!
and GLOBALIZATION
FROM BELOW. He can be reached at: jbrecher@igc.org.
Endnotes:
1."Iran:
End Vigilante Attacks," Human Rights News, June 20,
2003. See also press communiqué of the International
Committee for Transition to Democracy in Iran (CITDI), June 23,
2003. citdi@yahoo.fr.
2. An exception is a critical statement
by the International Committee for Transition to Democracy
in Iran signed by Samir Amin, Noam Chomsky, Harold Pinter,
and Edward Said, among others, cited above.
3. Although it is alleged that "much
of the antiwar left has sadly long since stopped caring about
the actual freedom of people under oppressive regimes, except,
of course, if their plight is a way to blame or excoriate the
United States." Andrew Sullivan, "Shocking Silence,"
Salon, June 19, 2003.
4.Gabriel Kolko, Another
Century of War? (New York: New Press, 2002), pp. 23-4.
According to The New York Times, today young Iranians "express
nostalgia for the man ousted in that coup, the nationalistic
Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh." Elaine Sciolino,
"Nuclear Ambitions Aren't New for Iran," The New
York Times, June 22, 2003.
5.This effort went to bizarre extremes.
"Iranians working for the C.I.A. and posing as Communists
harassed religious leaders and staged the bombing of one cleric's
home in a campaign to turn the country's Islamic religious community
against Mossadegh's government." James Risen, "Secrets
of History: The C.I.A. in Iran," The New York Times
on the Web. "The
Secret CIA History of the Iran Coup, 1953," National
Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 28.
6. Kolko, op.cit., p. 25.
7."Iran:
U.K. Government Should Press for Real Reform," Human
Rights News, February 4, 2003.
8. "Poll on U.S. Ties Rocks Iran,"
BBC News, October 2, 2003.
9. Sciolino, op cit.
10.The movement has received support
from satellite broadcasts by Iranian exiles in the U.S., some
of them advocates of restoring the shah.
11. A partial exception was tacit cooperation
against the Taliban during the U.S. attack on Afghanistan.
12. Sciolino, op.cit. Recent French repression
of opponents of the Islamic Republic who were apparently flirting
with U.S. officials can be interpreted as a statement of France's
continuing determination to support the Iranian regime in
the face of U.S. threats.
13.Ibid.
14. Anton La Guardia, "Rice Warns
of 'Made in America' Solution to Iran's Nuclear Plans,"
The Daily Telegraph, June 27, 2003.
15.Sciolino, op.cit.
16."In the immediate terms, President
Bush's vocal support for student demonstrations has administered
them the kiss of death." Nihal Singh, "Mideast Preoccupation
Dooms U.S. Strategy to Destabilize Iran," Khaleej Times,
June 24, 2003.
17. Ardeshir Moaveni, "Recent
clashes open new fault lines in Iran," Eurasia Insight,
July 2, 2003, available at
18.Iran is a signatory to the International
Declaration of Human Rights. However, the UN recently cancelled
the position of the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights to
Iran.
Weekend Edition Features for July 19 / 20, 2003
Arthur
Mitzman
Will the Pax Americana be More Sustainable
Than the Dot.com Bubble?
Julian
Bond
We Shall be Heard
Cynthia
McKinney
Bush's Racial Politics at Home and Abroad
Mel
Goodman
What is to be Done with the CIA?
Jason Leopold
Tenet Blames Wolfowitz
Mickey
Z.
History Forgave Churchill
Doug Giebel
Impeachment as the Message
Jon
Brown
Whipping the Post
Mano Singham
Cheney's Oil Maps
Steven
Sherman
Nickle, Dimed and Slimed at UNC
Robin Philpot
Liberia: History Doesn't Repeat Itself, It Stutters
Khaldoun
Khelil
Capturing Friedman
Jeffrey
St. Clair
You Must Leave Home, Again: Gilad Atzmon's A Guide to the Perplexed
Lenni
Brenner
Sitting in with Mingus
Vanessa
Jones
Three Dog Night
Adam
Engel
Video Judas Video
Poets'
Basement
Foley, Smith and Curtis
Website
of the Weekend
Illegal Art
Keep CounterPunch
Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home / subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
|