Lessons for Egypt from Iran
Michael Totten has an important must-read interview with Iranian exile Abbas Milani, professor at Stanford, who discusses the Shah, the 1979 Iranian Revolution that led to the present theocracy there, and how it might relate to Egypt today.
Here’s Milani is on the events leading up to 1979 in Iran:
MJT: But what should Carter have done instead [vis a vis the Shah]? Are you saying he was he wrong to talk about human rights?
Abbas Milani: No, he should have talked about human rights, but he also should have understood that you have to go step by step. Concessions need to be made in a timely fashion from a position of power. Carter should have made it clear that he was for change, but not for change at any price. Brzezinski understood this much better than anyone else in the administration but didn’t get his way. And on the other side we had the Shah undergoing chemotherapy and his endogenous paranoia, depression, indecisiveness and vacillation. The result was disaster…
And lurking around the corner was Khomeini who cleverly understood what the Americans wanted. The Americans wanted a more responsive democratic government, and Khomeini promised it to them. I have found evidence of his contacting Americans.
MJT: Who in the US did he contact?
Abbas Milani: The American Embassy in Paris. He also sent a letter to Carter. His allies in Tehran were also in contact with the American Embassy. They were saying Khomeini was not as bad as the Shah was making him out to be. All of them were helped by Iranian intellectuals who have a great responsibility in all this.
MJT: What did you think about Khomeini at the time?
Abbas Milani: I was an opponent of the Shah. I spent a year in prison. For six months I was in Evin Prison. The future leaders of the Islamic Republic were my cellmates.
MJT: You knew these guys?
Abbas Milani: I knew all of them. I spent six months with them. I knew they were bad news. I knew that what they were going to deliver was not democracy.
But most people had never read any of Khomeini’s writings because they were banned. The Shah, instead of making them mandatory reading, banned them. In the 1960s and 70s Khomeini had already talked about almost everything he did. Even in 1944 he talked about how evil democracy and modernity are, how evil the rule of law is. He talked about the establishment of Velayat-e faqih, the rule of Islamic jurists. These books could have been an absolutely clear indication of where his regime would go, but they were banned. Even those who were willing, like me, to actually read this stuff, we dismissed it because we were under the Age of Enlightenment illusion that religion is the opiate of the masses and that there is an inverse correlation between reason and science on the one hand and religion on the other. We believed that Iran was too advanced for these ideas.
Milani and his cohorts can be forgiven their failure to understand what was about to happen. After all, it was exceedingly unusual for a modern and secular (or seemingly modern and seemingly secular) country to become a fundamentalist theocracy. But from the example of Iran we know full well that it could happen in Egypt too, so there are no more excuses for ignoring or minimizing the possibility.
Milani also says:
Governments can no longer rely on fear alone. It’s much easier now to break through it than it used to be.
I disagree. Governments could rely on fear alone—it is just that most modern governments, even that of the ayatollahs, are more reluctant than tyrannies of the past to get out the big guns and use them freely on their own people. When a dictatorship gets to the point where it is reluctant to kill large numbers of demonstrators to stay in power, then it is much easier for the people to “break through,” because the population will always outnumber those in power, who can only stay in power either by serving the needs of the people or by frightening them into submission.
Now comes the fruit of our Pied Piper’s promises and it may very well lead to Armeggedon. Here’s the setup. About the time more power is assumed and entrenched by the MB is the time a dirty nuclear bomb will go off. It will most likely be the U.S. but it may not be. However, where before a unilateral and overwhelming response could have brought peace, now the same response will only incite war and so shall it be.
1. I shared an office with an Iranian expatriate while the Shah was being ousted. Though he was a typical far-left antianticommunist academic type, he had no illusions about Khomeini.
“They’ll kill…they’ll butcher…the Bahais are done for…”
2. Governments could rely on fear alone–it is just that most modern governments, even that of the ayatollahs, are more reluctant than tyrannies of the past to get out the big guns and use them freely on their own people.
I agree. Perhaps the reluctance is more for economic reasons rather than out of decency.
If some modern Lenin/Stalin/Hitler/Mao figures out how to combine the power of a modern economy and an aggressive totalitarian ideology, watch out. History may decide that Deng laid the groundwork for this, but IMHO it’s not yet clear one way or another.
When a dictatorship gets to the point where it is reluctant to kill large numbers of demonstrators to stay in power, then it is much easier for the people to “break through,” because the population will always outnumber those in power, who can only stay in power either by serving the needs of the people or by frightening them into submission.
or convince them (through planning) that their lives lived for family, with their work not being taxable by the state, and freedom to spend their day how they wished given the limitations of living and money…
is a happy gulag..
and that working for the state, and for strangers who watch your kids, and teach them less and less so that fear isnt necessary, they are helpless and cant live without the structures of the leadership.
following the Brave new world idea, you end up with freedom converted to slavery which we all freedom.
the last assertions of your points are erroneous, they represent the common knowledge which is wrong, not the historical facts.
for instance, the fear you refer to, is imagined always to come from the jack booted thugs, and that its torture, and attacks that are feared, and all that hollyweird crap.
but thats not how it works. and that’s not where the fear comes from, and so on.
i have tried and tried to explain it over and over and the minute one is done reading, they forget and revert back.
guess what? THAT is the mechanism of a totalitarian state!!! its a symptom that its victims return to the base state set by the common knowledge which is established by repetitious soundings.
this idea of fear of being killed by the state is something that people who have not lived in such states pretend to be knowing about. while that is certainly a possibility, that’s NOT where the majority fear and weight comes from.
PLEASE read up on it…
who controls the majority message of the main stream. the people who are known to be truthful or the people who accept lying is moral when its in service to the cause?
at what point does one realize that almost everything they have been taught through this osmosis process is wrong, and designed to make them crippled from opposition?
that those in thrall are so trained that they cant break away from returning to the failed explanations over and over.
like a sad woman who keeps getting into bad relationships as a way to try to make it work and fix it, rather than accept it, move on to healthier ends.
they keep returning to the bad thing they were taught int rust and keep trying to make it work. but it WONT work, if it did work, they would not have been stressing that.
we already live in the fear of totalitarianism but until they line up people and shoot them, we wont believe it. as if that is the only determinate or the key one, when its not even a necessity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
after all, stalin and hitler marched people off to camps, so we look to see if someone will do that, and we wait and ignore every other part.
what if Stalin and Hitler instead were more patient, more willing to be a part of the final end rather than the only maker of it?
what if, they created social engineering that would demoralize the target.
what if they made laws which made the future capricious, and rather than indeterminate till merit was on the table, totally determinate by the state of your being at birth? so that one knows that no matter how hard one tries, they are the wrong sex, wrong gender, have the wrong ideas, are not equal, etc…
what then if they skewed the economics so that certain groups would be financially impinged, say by taking money and giving it to others. so that the moral people in this group then question whether they should have children, or can afford it. and so self sterilize or self abort any children that appear.
what then if we called it a social good, and made sure that there was nothing to slow the choice down, like waiting periods, finances, distance to travel, etc.
we could then exterminate 55 million people and no one would blink an eye.
basically all your saying is if we get a stupid thug, we are ready for him, but if we get a manipulative patient collectivist group who acclimatizes us first, and manipulates the environment to remove the responsible parties from being targeted for what they are doing, we can ignore it.
kind of why we have exterminated 55 million americans, and replaced them with unequal and unfair immigration so that when people look at the reports they dont notice the decline.
hide the decline started with demographics.
what you dont realize is that the failure of communism in soviet union last century was not the failure of communism. it was the failure of overt power over covert power. the obvious and ubiquitous losing over the hidden and circumspect.
the key salient points that make the end what it is are completely ignored in favor of a cartoon.
what made and makes it hell is the complete and unable ability to act on your own will without regard for other things which would normally have no bearing! and that this thing has seeped into all aras of your live, making the “personal political” as the feminists would say.
if the state ordered the destruction of family in favor of a state cattle model, would people comply? no. of course not. but you can create the social environment by other means and they will.
if you traveled to places more free than the US, and not by the leftists standards the difference would shock you. or if you compare the past with today.
in the past, you were free to open a lemonade stand and sell drinks. today you cant unless the state gets involved and you get a permit, and so on.
your waiting for the jack boots and i am telling you its not jack boots its administrators. the jack boots are only hirlings of the administrators, and there are many ways to administrate and get what you want from people. especially when you are loath to the waste and problems of the direct way.
after all, you can take a rope, you can get it around the neck of a dog, and you can fight like crazy to get the dog to the edge of a cliff, and work really hard to push him off, maybe taking yourself with them.
OR
you can take some meat… share a tiny bit with them, play and pretend your a friend, then throw the rest of the meat over the edge. the dog will gladly jump off the cliff for you.
all your describing is that the first is not the same as the second because the first uses overt force, and the second hides in ambiguity of purpose with knowlege of outcome and is not overtly violent.
we already have it. it already here.
the final things are being made where they no longer can hide it, and so their victims are noticing and STARTING the discussion. they are barely learning that the people they were taught to hate for what they said against what we have, were right, and that we are now on the forefront of the realization of their missives!
do searches and you will find:
Generation Y women losing ‘female’ skills such as cooking, ironing and sewing
we call them female skills, but in truth, if you take the skills that men and women no longer can pass down to their children. combine that with intentional crippling of their minds.
and guess what? they cant invent or act to do what you claim and think is natural, which is to oppose their keepers.
you dont realize that withotu the family information and all that, they cant screw in a lightbulb or make a choice as to an action. heck, they cant even debate to a conclusion any more!!!!!!!!!!!
while they ahve described it as liberation, and all that, what it is is domestication.
women were free with all the skills needed to survive wtout a contrived reality created by others and the negation of knowlege needed to domesticate them.
now they are too stupid to even decide for themselves!!!!
they decide what they are told to decide and then pretend its what they wanted, but if you list out what they are getting, giving up and all, they are dumbfounded
people who have no knowlege other than what their owners give them, are domesticated.
read your history and learn that what we call blacksmiths puzzles are actually locks before locks were invented as we know them.
you see… the elite were not educated in a crippled way, and so they can work out the puzzle and so open the lock. but the domesticated slaves or servants cant.
your confusing aristocracy trying to jam the genie back in the bottle by force as something different than devious aristocracy tricking the genie back into the bottle and taking up their place on top of all
stupidity and mental crippling is a prison that you cant get out of.
and if you apply that to whats going on today, you will see that the result will not be what people here assume through wishful thinking pretending to be erudition.
“. . . and the intellectuals were obsessed with themselves. They thought they were the only game in town. If you look at the intellectual critical discourse in Iran, almost nothing was written about the Islamists. Almost nothing. I worry that the same thing might be happening in Egypt. “–from Totten
Sounds like the intellectuals in America. When will the American people rise up in fury over the atrocious stupidity of our intellectual class? Have they? The only hope and future comes from the resistance of the tea party.
Economic recovery. Right.
Democratic regime change. Sure.
everyone is calling for muby to step down.
problem is that many others are saying if he steps down fast, guess who will grab things?
right now, the pieces are being moved and set up to surround Israel.
All this dissolves the peace treaties…
what remains are states which are free to act and not be thought of as treaty violators.
Wiki leaks has exposed that AQ has a lot of nuclear material…
From the article:
and from the article:
so which is it?
its impossible, or they knew decades ahead?
check out the price of crude today…
and on the subject of knowing what will happen by reading what the leaders of things write:
and here i am an idiot, just like the man being interviewed, knowing the bad news, and knowing because i have read their writings and have met some of their people.
i have said over and over and over to read them
i haven even quoted stuff written in 1901 that describes what we have now…
But either because the books were allowed to pass into that goodnight of not being published any more. or being removed from shelves by leftists going to the library with a list (yes they have done that a lot). to just leaving it out in school.
together they are a passive aggressive version of how to ban something.
and since we didnt read them, didnt read their large tracts describing the future, we never saw how these goals never changed, just tactics for the times changed based on opportunities and what could be exploited (you work with what you have not with what you wish you have).
but most deny everything… after all, they didnt tell them to read it, make it easy, summarize it truthfully, put it on a silver platter and force feed them!
but over and over… my missive is exactly the same
stop being ignorant and read what they write, wish for, advise, design, etc….
THEN you will know them from what they describe themselves to be, not what they tell lies to avoid alienation and marginalization and being disqualified from the game.
not only that, but you will read discussions spanning years as to waht to do to people to get their way. laws that are key (no fault divorce, etc). you can even read missives of other states informing people here as to waht tact to take. (and how they spin like tops, like molotive rippentrop made them. while the idiots pretend that they actually have a position, when they have none)
READ what they write…
you will then wonder why and how anyone supports them!!!!
Fear is a useful tool in the hands of the power hungry. Its use takes many forms. Anthropomorphic global warming is the use of fear to gain control over how people live their daily lives. The eugenics movement used fear to justify forced sterilization and abortions. Hitler used that same tool quite effectively to gain and hold power and slaughter millions.
Obama-Reid-Pelosi used fear to pass their multi-trillion dollar spending debacle. (Think about all the terrible things they said would happen without the so-called stimulus and Obamacare.) Politicians love to wield fear, it allows them to usurp more power. The media loves fear, its their prime source of revenue.
Fear sways the masses. It justifies needless actions that create great tragedies. And of course, priests, preachers, and ayatollahs use fear. Its an age old tool, and its use as a tool probably predates the use of the first axe chipped from stone.
Arfldgr: I think Milani is saying that no one predicted what’s happening in Egypt today, and he’s also saying that in 1958 the CIA predicted the Iranian Revolution of 1979 (although not the date, nor the fact that the mullahs would take it over).
It does seem if the latter could have been predicted, then the former should have been predicted as well.
Reading this made me think of two things which aren’t directly relevant, but definitely fit into the broader situation:
Firstly, while Carter was incompetent, it is arguable about how much responsibility he holds for the Iranian Revolution. He probably did all the wrong things, but as we are seeing in Tunisia and Egypt, without sending in an occupying army, there are limits to what anyone outside the country, including the world’s resident superpower, can do once the situation reaches a tipping point. But Carter made a bad situation a whole lot worse with the hostage crisis, which was farcical. He should have given a single, short speech, to the effect that by its actions, Iran had declared war on the USA (which was true), ordered a mobilisation and ordered an assault on Iran. In addition, he could have added that if any hostages were killed, then no negotiated settlement would be possible, and that all members of the Iranian leadership would be declared war criminals (ie no stop to hostilities until the whole Iranian leadership were dead or in custody — making it personal for them). And of course we know now the Iranian leadership would have buckled immediately. Instead, Carter showed abject weakness, and the US and the rest of the world are still paying the price.
Secondly, it is hard to see how the situation in Egypt is good for the Iranian leadership. In fact, if in succeeds, it will highlight the failure of the Iranian democracy demonstrations after the last, robbed, election. The Iranian economy continues to deteriorate, and nothing else appears to be improving, so it is hard to see why the democracy sentiment should have gone away. With Iraq continuing to improve, and oppressive regimes elsewhere being overthrown, I wonder just how long the Iran erupts against the Mullahs again, this time in the firm knowledge they can win.
As it seems on topic, I will recycle my comment from the Jimmy Carter thread:
The Carter administration was very naé¯ve. Recall what Andrew Young, US Ambassador to the UN, said about Khomeini after his return to Iran from exile in Paris: “Khomeini will be somewhat of a saint when we get over the panic.”
Very saintly.
[page 106: Andrew Young: Civil Rights Ambassador,by Andrew DeRoche]
By no means was this the only naé¯ve statement made by a member of the Carter Administration regarding Iran.
Rathtyen,
You are right on target. The ayatollahs & the revolutionary guard declared war when they seized the embassy. Carter mistakenly continued (for 444 days no less) to try to negotiate with the Iranians after they took our diplomats hostage! There can be no discourse between sovereign nations when one nation takes the other nation’s diplomats hostage.
Shame on Jimmy! I’m convinced that Carter’s bungling of that situation deeply influenced the jihadists. It lead them to believe we were a paper tiger. I contend there is a direct connection between Carter’s wishy-washy handling of the embassy invasion and black hawk down, WTC bombing 1, the bombing of our embassies in Tanzania & Kenya, the Cole incident, and the collapse of those beautiful towers on 9/11/01.
BTW, Reagan’s decision to bug out of Beirut after the bombing of the Marine barracks also contributed to this image of America as a paper tiger.
Does anyone still remember that even in 1979 the Soviets still had interests in the middle east?
Are we really so sure we could have went in there without starting World War 3 or totally destabalizing the entire middle east?
I also don’t know the state of our Army back then as far as troop transports, mobilization, and etc. Didn’t Reagan have to perform a huge defense build up?
Lastly, if Carter had been a total wimp, would he have tried to rescue the hostages at all?
I’m not convinced we “lost” Iran. Should we have tried rescue sooner, maybe tried a harder tack, possibly even supported the Sha more? I can buy all that, but I’m still not convinced that once it got to the point where the Sha was in exile that we really could have put boots on the ground to do much of anything in the ME without some sort of hideous blowback.
Still, as I said in another thread: I’d risk war with the entire Middle East and a general draft if that is what it takes to keep the oil flowing.
P.S:
I know the Shah *forgot the “h”* left before the hostages were taken. Forgive my crappy train-of-thought writing.
Brad,
I remember the embassy stand off all too well. It sickened me then and it still sticks in my craw. IMO, Carter should have told the ayatollahs that they had 72 hours to bring all embassy staff and all private American citizens in Iran to the Tehran airport at which time we would begin landing C-130 transports to take them home. Non-compliance means the B-52s start bombing in 72 hours and 1 second.
I don’t know of any other way to deal with people like the ayatollahs. Its painfully obvious they can not be negotiated with in good faith. That might have meant those Americans would have been casualties of war, but so be it. In such situations a leader has to harden the heart and realize that allowing punks to bully you around is a recipe for disaster down the line. IMO, sooner is always better than later when it comes to drawing a line in the sand.
What we have going on at this time is a collusion between the unions, the marxists,and the Islamists
in this country. This bloc is inflaming revolution both in the middle east, and here at home. Code Pink,Trumka
and Cair all have the same objective, and that is the overthrow of this christian capitalist nation, and to end
it’s power. We need,as soon as possible, a return of
congress’s committee on un American activity’s, and
the removal of all Islamists from positions of influence.
and deportation of all muslim’s who will not renounce
sharia.
This time even B-52 are not necessary. One cruise missile at Aswan dam will do the trick. Half of Egypt would be washed into Mediterranean in matter of an hour.
what do you do with 80+ million Muslims that have been indoctrinated for over a generation with hatred of western values? Do you let them sue for “freedom” and “democracy” and then let them elect the Islamists to rule them according to their values? Or do you let a dictator repress them, denying them many of their of human and civil rights, and also keep the peace in the region for the rest of humanity? Either way the Egyptians lose. And so do we, because what does that make us, if we choose a lesser repression over a greater more evil one??
“what does that make us, if we choose a lesser repression over a greater more evil one??”
Grown up and judical.
Governments can no longer rely on fear alone. It’s much easier now to break through it than it used to be.
Great news for the North Koreans.
I can’t claim to know anything about the Egyptian situation except that it could be very bad for us in the outcome. I found the article below to be very interesting – it’s an view I hadn’t considered.
http://betsyspage.blogspot.com/2011/02/importance-of-legal-system.html
I was just listening to Sandmonkey at Pajamas Media. He has apparently been arrested but he made some excellent points.
There is a new factor that none of us quite know how to fit into any calculations concerning Egypt’s future (or any other dictatorship), the ability to mass communicate and generate demonstrations for or against anything almost on a minute by minute basis. Assuming the vast majority of Egyptians do not want Islamist’s hate and violence but prefer economic progress there may be the possibility that a few unknown people on twitter may at least be able to lead demonstrations against Moslem Brotherhood types.
As for being indoctrinated in anti-western hate propaganda, I get a feeling the Egyptians are not buying it, or else the demonstrations would have never occurred. the information age has allowed them to see the rest of the world. Lying just doesn’t seem to work, example, the Soviet Union. that empire was killed by the information age.
In short maybe it is too soon too write off Egypt.
Bob
the peasants voted for the local priests after the French Revolution…
We don’t understand the what they are saying. Did you see the PEW research poll on Egyptians’ views supporting various Islamic organizations?
and about supporting Islamic forms of punishment?
Freedom from what? From US/Western dominance via Mubarak/Abdullah in Jordan/Ben Ami in Tunisia. Iran 1979 and Oslo Peace fiasco should be putting us on alert to the message behind message. Any body been monitoring what’s being said in Arabic??? with all due respect to Sandmonkey, and he deserves a ton of respect because the guy is supremely courageous , he’s in a minorty in the .00n range. He does not represent the street.
Warlord
Most people don’t believe the LEft is allied with Islam, so view all of America’s problems through an anti-Sarah Palin esque blame Republican type of philosophy.
This in itself is just a propaganda armor designed to make the sheep into more useful cannonfodder.
He does not represent the street.
Neither does the Left represent the streets of America.
However, in a democracy or tyranny, one doesn’t need majority opinion to take power and force people to do as they should.
This is purely evidenced by human fate and history.
If a people are willing to do anything for victory, their numbers don’t matter.
I can buy all that, but I’m still not convinced that once it got to the point where the Sha was in exile that we really could have put boots on the ground to do much of anything in the ME without some sort of hideous blowback.
if Carter’s support of the Ayatollah against the Shah isn’t evidence that Leftists made us lose, I’m not sure what would be.