Malkin’s tirades on Iran
It has been frustrating to witness the outraged blathering of the far right commentators on developments In Iran. When they spit vitriol and acid at domestic issues it is bad enough, but when they apply their one-eyed world view to international matters, the consequences can be far more serious. Let us take the far right mouthpiece, the queen of snark, Michelle Malkin, as an example. She is a tiny woman, in terms of intellect, understanding and morality, whose raison d’etre is to attack anything that potentially smacks of progress and advancement. She is a flat-world political ideologue; what was is always better than what could be. She is the cheerleader for the ‘race, religion and rifle’ brigade, that cling to their bitter existence at the rabid fringes of an otherwise evolving US society. While her petty and spiteful world view feeds the rage of her apparently similarly always-angry readership, her knowledge and understanding of the dynamics of the international geopolitical landscape is frighteningly challenged. However, as is often the case with Malkin, her lack of knowledge on a matter does not restrict her voice – she shouts loudest when she doesn’t understand a topic.
She has been running her strident pieces during the last week in support of the Iran demonstrations. One cannot fault her for the desire for greater social freedom and transparency of democratic process there, though in Malkin’s case, her motivations are probably more Machiavellian than most. In her tirades, she has consistently criticized the Obama Administration’s restraint in openly criticizing Tehran and supporting the demonstrators. What commentators such as Malkin fail to realize, or are incapable of acknowledging in their headlong pursuit to demonize the Obama Administration, is that it is not in US interests to make such open declarations of support. Firstly, it would provide Ahmadinejad and his supporters with the necessary ammunition to turn the debate fully into an anti-American issue. If Obama expresses open support, it allows Tehran to play the nationalist card and say that the demonstrators are nothing more than the agents of America’s desire for a regime change. Such rhetoric could motivate those in Iranian society currently on the fence to come down on the side of Ahmadinejad. It also immediately, in the eyes of many Iranians, invalidates any claim for the moral high-ground. In addition, should a regime change not be the result, Obama and his Administration would have an even more difficult time attempting any form of limited rapprochement with a returned Ahmadinejad government.
Malkin, and sadly many of her ilk, lack the sophistication of thinking to understand the foreign policy process, and would adopt a blunt-force mantra. Dick Cheney was the God of such a foreign policy strategy, and a hero to Malkin and her crew. When the ‘Malkinites’ rant domestically, they can be allowed more forbearance, but the ‘bull in the china shop’ approach to international relations is a non-starter. If Malkin would read/watch something more than Twitter and You Tube to force-feed her natural predilection to indignant outrage, she may see the hand that Tehran is preparing play. A Malkin head-long pursuit for regime damnation would see her lead the US right into Tehran’s trap. A declaration by Obama would open the US up to the same level of criticism the Iranian foreign minister has just laid on France, Germany and the UK. Already Tehran is rolling out the hidden hand of American influence in current events , it would only take a declaration such as Malkin is howling for to make matters worse for both the US position and the Iranian people. Malkin meddles where she has no expertise, and at the hand of an amateur much damage can be caused in the subtle world of international diplomacy. If she has to scream stridently, it is best she shouts at the wind on US domestic matter, rather than adding her voice to the crass screaming of the US far right disturbia crowd on Iran. There is a certain irony in far-right opposing water cannons but supporting water-boarding as an example of a double standard that confuses observers in Tehran. In this war of words, Tehran has already fired its opening shots in claiming US-backed MKO influence in the riots, and the US response needs to be considered not strident regardless of what the far-right recommends.
The terrorist Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) has reportedly played a major role in intensifying the recent wave of street violence in Iran.
Iranian security officials reported Saturday that they have identified and arrested a large number of MKO members who were involved in recent riots in Iran’s capital.
According to the security officials, the arrested members had confessed that they were extensively trained in Iraq’s camp Ashraf to create post-election mayhem in the country.
Anne Singleton, an expert on the MKO and author of ‘Saddam’s Private Army’ explains that the West aims to keep the group afloat in order to use it in efforts to stage a regime change in Iran.
“With a new Administration in the White House a pre-emptive strike on Iran looks unlikely. Instead the MKO’s backers have put together a coalition of small irritant groups, the known minority and separatist groups, along with the MKO. These groups will be garrisoned around the border with Iran and their task is to launch terrorist attacks into Iran over the next few years to keep the fire hot,” she explains.
“The role of the MKO is to train and manage these groups using the expertise they acquired from Saddam’s Republican Guard,” Singleton added.
A May 2005 Human Rights Watch report also condemns the MKO for running prison camps in Iraq and committing human rights violations. According to report, the outlawed group puts defectors under torture and jail terms.
Sphere: Related Content
