Lets Hope God Works in Mysterious Ways

First, let me apologize to my 6 readers for being so lazy and inattentive to this blog. I also realize that my last two postings promised follow-ups which I have not provided. I will try to honor that promise soon. However, allow me to move to a new subject today.

I read this morning the thought-provoking Wall Street Journal Op-Ed piece by Amir Taheri about the Democratic Movement in Iran (p. A25). Mr. Taheri describes a process of increasing pressure on the government by an ever bolder opposition. The article implies that the overthrow of the regime is inevitable and imminent. I hope it is true. I am a little concerned that Taheri may be allowing his hopes to run ahead of the reality, but I certainly have no knowledge that enables me to gainsay his views. Clearly, Mr. Taheri loves his country, and as we know, love "hopes all things."

Let’s assume, for the moment, that he is correct that the regime is in its terminal phase and that the opposition, when it comes to power, will: 1) stop Iran's nuclear weapons program; 2) defund Hamas and Hezbollah; 3) establish a constitutional separation of church and state; and 4) establish a true democractic republic, among other things.

In some respects, this may be attributable to the Obama administration's foreign policy, which is no credit to the administration, but may be credit to God.

One of the common placards carried in the opposition rallies poses a question to Obama: "Are you with us, or with them?" To our shame, the administration has repeatedly and emphatically answered "We are with them" by virtue of the choices its makes. The American Government no longer makes encouraging or supportive statements about Iranians yearning for true democracy and an end to totalitarian government (as we used to do, and as we did for Eastern Europeans before the wall fell). We legitimize Ahmadinejad's government by, for example, 1) not making an issue of the Iranian election fraud and 2) negotiating with them about the nuclear issue as if everyone involved is dealing in good faith.

America's current foreign policy, of futilely attempting to make friends of those whose core political identity is built upon virulent Anti-Americanism (e.g. Chavez in Venezuela) while making life difficult for our friends (e.g. Colombia), is so catastrophically inimical to American interests and inept, that national leaders who seek to attribute all their internal problems to the workings of a vast and insidious American conspiracy, implemented by the CIA, are beginning to flunk the laugh test.

America obviously no longer supports its friends or resists its foes. It neither acts in its own national interest, in a "realpolitik" sense, nor does it support those abroad who espouse its core principles and resist those who seek to destroy those principles. (Indeed the domestic activities of this administration suggest that it does not consider broad economic and political freedom of the individual citizen to be a core principle for which we stand - it seems to be motivated by the idea that the best and most efficient generator of societal good is a central government run by an elite who know better than you what is good for you.)

Ahmedinajad has been successful in the past characterizing opposition to his government as treason, giving aid and comfort to the enemy, the Great Satan. This is no longer credible. Iranian's progress toward nuclear power status, for example, is now almost entirely a function of its resources and commitment, (and the decision that Isreal will make) and not a function of the strength of American (or western) resistance.

If the improbable does happen (and the Iranian regime falls), no doubt the Administration will claim credit. But one is not entitled to take credit for an unintended consequence of one’s actions. The Administration's approach to the current Iranian government is based on the premise that they are the legitimate government of that country and they are permanant so we have to deal with them.

I say improbable because I do not believe that history shows us an example of a totalitarian regime falling merely from the effects of internal opposition, even when it expresses the will of the majority, unless that opposition has 1) very strong material support from outside or 2) the regime itself, in the face of opposition, loses its nerve to be as brutal as necessary to stay in power (e.g. the Shah's government). So, if the opposition has the nerve to stay in the streets despite killings, beatings, jailings and torture, the final question will be decided in the hearts of the "guardians" of the republic, who say their primary loyalty is to the will of God.

Let’s hope (pray) that God does work in mysterious ways and speaks authoritatively to these men.