by Prof. Hillel Frisch
It would be utterly cynical and self-defeating were the US and others to encourage the protesters without planning how they can defend themselves and bring down the regime.
Protest in Kermanshah, Iran, 29 December 2017, photo sent by a protester to
News, retrieved via Wikimedia Commons
BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 711, January 9, 2018
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Rhetorical
support for the Iranian protesters in their quest for freedom is not
enough. The US, with the help of its allies, including Israel, must work
24/7 to provide – at the most opportune moment – arms and the knowhow
to use them to the protesters against the regime. The time to act will
be when casualties of the regime can be identified as coming from a
broad spectrum of the Iranian public.
Commentators and experts have lauded President
Trump and US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley for their clear rhetorical
support for the Iranian protesters in their quest for freedom. Some
have urged the US to provide information platforms to the protesters to
circumvent the blockage of new media by the authorities.
While this would be helpful, it is hardly
sufficient. The US, with the help of its allies, including Israel, must
work around the clock to provide arms and the knowhow to use them to the
Iranian protesters.
It should be clear why this is the case. The
Iranian regime is as ruthless as they come and will commit any kind of
atrocity against the protesters if it believes itself to be in danger –
indeed, even well short of such a threat. It would be utterly cynical
and self-defeating were the US and others to encourage the protesters
without planning how they can defend themselves and bring down the
regime.
For arms to be effectively provided, protesters
who can use them have to be identified and contacted, and supply
networks have to be built. These must be tailored to meet the needs of a
variegated group of people operating in different environments. Some
will be engaged in urban warfare, others in hit-and-run ambushes on the
country’s roads and rail lines across the country, and still others as
hit squads to assassinate regime officials and security personnel in a
bid to turn the hunters into the hunted.
In areas inhabited by minorities, such as the
Kurds or the Arabs in the country’s southwest, efforts should be
expended to conduct guerrilla operations. Heating up the country’s
periphery, where these minorities live, will do much to reduce the heat
on the urban fighters who will carry the brunt of the fighting in
meeting the primary strategic goal of the armed conflict – taking over
and maintaining their hold on Tehran.
These protesters-turned-freedom fighters will have
to be given intelligence as well, which will impose the arduous task of
making sure that both the arms and the intelligence flow to the genuine
opposition rather than into the hands of state agents.
At some point, this aid will have to be buttressed
by much tougher sanctions to the point of a blockade on the country’s
ports or flight zones. Such sanctions will no doubt impose tremendous
hardship on the Iranian people, but will also drive home the point that
the maintenance of the regime is untenable and the quicker it is removed
the quicker there will be the relief. Such a realization will, one
hopes, induce many to give aid and shelter to the fighters.
Planning and creating a rudimentary network to
provide arms and intelligence should have started in 2009. If it was
not begun then, it must begin now.
Creating a rebellion is all about
coalition-building. A massive coalition of disparate groups brought down
the Shah in 1978, and only a broad coalition of forces will bring down
the ayatollahs today. Relying on the westernized, more secular upper
middle class in the universities or the better neighborhoods of Tehran
will not be sufficient.
Moving too early might alienate the conservative
and nationalist majority and play into the hands of government
propaganda. Moving too slowly will facilitate regime efforts to crush
the opposition.
The time to act will be when casualties of the
regime mount and can be identified as coming from a broad, urban to
rural spectrum of the Iranian public, which will be likely to spur an
equally variegated and broad public response of mourning and protest.
The US and its democratic allies face two dangers in treading this road – false moral qualms and the fear of failure.
There can be no qualms over these operations. Few
entities in the past half-century have caused as much harm and pain as
the ayatollah regime – against the hostages at the US embassy in Tehran;
against the Marines whose barracks were bombed in Lebanon – the second
biggest terror attack in US history after 9/11; and against the Jewish
Center in Argentina and subsequently the Israeli embassy, both of which
were targeted by Iranian terror. Iran is also responsible for the
creation of Hezbollah, currently under investigation for running a
billion dollar drug distribution ring. Removing the regime or even
denting its power would be a boon to the region and the world.
Should doubts intrude, consider the prospect of
this regime growing into a North Korean nuclear duplicate, with far
greater resources and greater proximity to both the US and Europe.
The second form of remorse is over failure. The
effort might fail, with bloody consequences for the opposition. But that
failure would be only temporary. Just as this wave succeeded the one
that surged a decade ago, another will follow.
The message must be that the regime of the ayatollahs is doomed. The cue is from Winston Churchill. Evil will be defeated.
This article was published in the Jerusalem Post on January 4, 2018.
BESA Center Perspectives Papers are published through the generosity of the Greg Rosshandler Family
Source: https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/arm-iranian-protesters/
Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment