Home » Congress » The Case for Doing Nothing (in Iran)

The Case for Doing Nothing (in Iran)

Should we help?

Should we help?

As usual, the United States Congress has voted to condemn actions of another nation by voting 405-1 to condemn Iran’s crackdown on protesters last week. It seems to be our policy to stick our noses into others’ businesses. The chicken-hawks are starting to make waves about Obama’s lack of intervention in the Iranian protests. While nearly every American surely wishes to see some change in Iran, it is wisest to not meddle in their affairs.

First, everyone assumes that a change in leadership in Iran means a change in their foreign policies. That’s not entirely accurate. Mousavi has stated that he would not put an end to their nuclear ambitions. Honestly, I don’t blame him. What incentative does he have? The US has rewarded those who attain nuclear weapons in the past.

Another reason we shouldn’t intervene is that there is some evidence that shows that Mousavi may have orchestrated terrorists attacks against US targets three decades ago. According a June 22nd article by CQ,

…Mir-Hossein Mousavi was waging a terrorist war on the United States that included bloody attacks on the U.S. embassy and Marine Corps barracks in Beirut.

Mousavi, prime minister for most of the 1980s, personally selected his point man for the Beirut terror campaign, Ali Akbar Mohtashemi-pur, and dispatched him to Damascus as Iran’s ambassador, according to former CIA and military officials.

CQ continues their evidence,

…Lyons, sometimes called “the father” of the Navy SEALs’ Red Cell counter-terror unit, also fingered Mousavi for the 1988 truck bombing of the U.S. Navy’s Fleet Center in Naples, Italy, that killed five persons, including the first Navy woman to die in a terrorist attack.

Bob Baer agrees that Mousawi, who has been celebrated in the West for sparking street demonstrations against the Teheran regime since he lost the elections, was directing the overall 1980s terror campaign.

But Baer, a former CIA Middle East field officer whose exploits were dramatized in the George Clooney movie “Syriana,”  places Mousavi even closer to the Beirut bombings.

Now, this post isn’t meant to be pro-Ahmadinejad. It is meant to show that intervention doesn’t always mean better results for the US. In fact, intervention tends to destabalize regions and cause resentment. That in turn leads to violence against American targets, known as “blowback.”


To see the culture of Iran and experience their struggles, I highly suggest you watch Rageh in Iran and listen to this free course (.mp3) from Berkeley, titled War Clouds Over the Persian Gulf: U.S. Iranian Relations by guest speaker Karim Sadjadpour of Carnegie Endownment for International Peace.

Rageh in Iran


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: