[Mb-civic] The Human Rights Case Against Attacking Iran By SHIRIN EBADI and HADI GHAEMI

[Michael Butler]

 The New York Times
February 8, 2005
OP-ED CONTRIBUTORS
The Human Rights Case Against Attacking Iran
By SHIRIN EBADI and HADI GHAEMI

DURING her tour of Europe, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has given
assurances that a military attack by the United States on Iran "is simply
not on the agenda at this point." But notwithstanding Ms. Rice's disavowal,
recent statements by the Bush administration, starting with President Bush's
State of the Union address and Vice President Dick Cheney's comments about a
possible Israeli military attack on Iran, are reminiscent of the rhetoric in
the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003. And Ms. Rice herself
made clear that "the Iranian regime's human rights behavior and its behavior
toward its own population is something to be loathed."

American policy toward the Middle East, and Iran in particular, is often
couched in the language of promoting human rights. No one would deny the
importance of that goal. But for human rights defenders in Iran, the
possibility of a foreign military attack on their country represents an
utter disaster for their cause.

The situation for human rights in Iran is far from ideal. Security forces
harass, imprison and even torture human rights defenders and civil society
activists. The authorities attack journalists and writers for expressing
their opinions and regularly shut down newspapers. Political prisoners
languish in jails. Superfluous judicial summonses are routinely used to
intimidate critics, and arbitrary detentions are common.

But Iranian society has refused to be coerced into silence. The human rights
discourse is alive and well at the grassroots level; civil society activists
consider it to be the most potent framework for achieving sustainable
democratic reforms and political pluralism.

Indeed, American readers might be surprised to know how vigorous Iran's
human rights organizations are. Last fall, when security forces unlawfully
detained more than 20 young journalists and bloggers because of what they
had written, independent Iranian organizations like the Center for Defense
of Human Rights, the Association of Journalists for Freedom of Press, and
the Students Association for Human Rights campaigned for their release.

This outcry, in tandem with support from the international community and
human rights organizations like Human Rights Watch, led to the release of
detainees. In fact, so great was the criticism of the abuses committed
during these detentions that some of Iran's most senior government officials
came out in favor of releasing the detainees.

Independent organizations are essential for fostering the culture of human
rights in Iran. But the threat of foreign military intervention will provide
a powerful excuse for authoritarian elements to uproot these groups and put
an end to their growth.

Human rights violators will use this opportunity to silence their critics by
labeling them as the enemy's fifth column. In 1980, after Saddam Hussein
invaded Iran and inflamed nationalist passions, Iranian authorities used
such arguments to suppress dissidents.

American hypocrisy doesn't help, either. Given the longstanding willingness
of the American government to overlook abuses of human rights, particularly
women's rights, by close allies in the Middle East like Saudi Arabia, it is
hard not to see the Bush administration's focus on human rights violations
in Iran as a cloak for its larger strategic interests.

Respect for human rights in any country must spring forth through the will
of the people and as part of a genuine democratic process. Such respect can
never be imposed by foreign military might and coercion - an approach that
abounds in contradictions. Not only would a foreign invasion of Iran vitiate
popular support for human rights activism, but by destroying civilian lives,
institutions and infrastructure, war would also usher in chaos and
instability. Respect for human rights is likely to be among the first
casualties.

Instead, the most effective way to promote human rights in Iran is to
provide moral support and international recognition to independent human
rights defenders and to insist that Iran adhere to the international human
rights laws and conventions that it has signed. Getting the Iranian
government to abide by these international standards is the human rights
movement's highest goal; foreign military intervention in Iran is the surest
way to harm us and keep that goal out of reach.

Shirin Ebadi, the 2003 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is the founder of
theCenter for Defense of Human Rights in Tehran, Iran. Hadi Ghaemi is a
researcher for Human Rights Watch.

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search |
Corrections | RSS | Help | Back to Top