Outlasting the Ayatollahs
The Obama policy of extending an open hand to Iran is working and ought not be abandoned because of the grim events in Tehran.
For the Iranian theocracy has just administered a body blow to its legitimacy in the eyes of the Iranian people and the world.
Before Saturday, the regime could credibly posture as defender of the nation, defiant in the face of the threats from Israel, faithful to the cause of the Palestinians, standing firm for Iran’s right to enrich uranium for peaceful nuclear power.
Today, the regime, including the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is under a cloud of suspicion that they are but another gang of corrupt politicians who brazenly stole a presidential election to keep themselves and their clerical cronies in power.
What should we do now? Wait for the dust to settle.
No U.S. denunciation of what took place in Iran is as credible as the reports and pictures coming out of Iran. Those reports, those pictures are stripping the mullahs of the only asset they seemed to possess – that, even if fanatics, they were principled, honest men.
Like Hamas, it was said of them that at least they were not corrupt, that at least they did not cheat the people.
No more. Today, in the streets of Tehran and other cities, they call to mind “Comrade Bob” Mugabe in Harare, Zimbabwe.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will never recapture that revolutionary purity he once seemed to possess as the man of the people who was elected president in the upset of 2005. Today, he appears, as the New York Times puts it, “as the shrewd and ruthless front man for a clerical military and political elite that is more unified and emboldened than at any time since the 1979 revolution.”
There are other reasons Obama should not heed the war hawks howling for confrontation now.
When your adversary is making a fool of himself, get out of the way. That is a rule of politics Lyndon Johnson once put into the most pungent of terms. U.S. fulminations will change nothing in Tehran. But they would enable the regime to divert attention to U.S. meddling in Iran’s affairs and portray the candidate robbed in this election, Mir Hossein Mousavi, as a poodle of the Americans.
When Nikita Khrushchev bathed the Hungarian revolution in blood, Ike did not break relations. Khrushchev was at Camp David three years later. When Deng Xiaoping and Co. ordered the tanks into Tiananmen Square, George Bush I did not break relations. When Moscow ordered Warsaw to crush Solidarity, Ronald Reagan did not let that act of repression deter him from seeking direct talks to reduce nuclear weapons.
Again, let us wait for the dust to settle.
By now, even Ahmadinejad and Ali Khamenei must recognize that the Iranian revolution is losing the Iranian people. This is the third of four straight presidential elections where the turnout has been huge and the candidate who promised reconciliation with the West and an easing of social strictures won a landslide among the student young. Those are the future leaders of Iran.
Which way the regime will now go is difficult to predict.
After Tienanmen Square, the Chinese rulers who ordered in the tanks sought to reconnect with the disillusioned young by opening up to the West and building a neo-capitalist economy.
Iran, in economic straits with U.S. sanctions biting, its oil and gas reserves dwindling, could try the same route. Seize the opposition’s best issues by seeking accommodation with America.
More likely, the regime, backed by the hard-line military, will try to reconnect with the masses and regain its reputation as defender of Islam and the nation, by defying the Americans, denouncing Israel, and pressing forward with Iran’s nuclear program.
The dilemma for America is that the theocracy defines itself and grounds its claim to leadership through its unyielding resistance to the Great Satan – the United States – and to Israel.
Nevertheless, Obama, with his outstretched hand, his message to Iran on its national day, his admission that the United States had a hand in the 1953 coup in Tehran, his assurances that we recognize Iran’s right to nuclear power, succeeded. He stripped the ayatollah and Ahmadinejad of their clinching argument – that America is out to destroy Iran and they are indispensable to Iran’s defense.
With the mask of patriotism and the legacy of true revolution lost through this election fraud, Iran’s regime stands exposed as just another dictatorship covering up a refusal to yield power and privilege with a pack of lies about protecting the nation.
Saturday’s election not only revealed the character of the Iranian regime. It also revealed that time is on our side. If the people of Iran can defy this regime, it is no threat to us.
As with the other revolutionary and totalitarian regimes, from the Soviet Union of Lenin and Stalin, to the People’s Republic of Mao, to the revolutionary Cuba of Fidel, America outlasts them all.
And the ayatollahs, too.
Read more by Patrick J. Buchanan
- The American Way of Abandonment – November 2nd, 2009
- The Fruits of Intervention – October 29th, 2009
- Generals Open New Front in Washington – October 5th, 2009
- Bitter Fruits of Mideast Wars – October 1st, 2009
- Is Iran Nearing a Bomb? – September 28th, 2009





Sirajuddin
June 16th, 2009 at 4:34 am
Your trillion dollar propaganda industry does not cut it anymore. Even Cuba will outlast you.
Sirajuddin
June 16th, 2009 at 6:10 am
Well, I have to make a correction to avoid misunderstanding. ' … Even Cuba will outlast Republicans.'
edgarh
June 16th, 2009 at 7:09 am
Pat is buying into the Western media's hype about the Iranian election. It may not be accurate which would make his advice as to caution even more sage. He also buys into the notion that Iran's younger voters are overwhelmingly pro-West. Having listened for decades to the media mantra about the youth of the 60's being wave of the future leftists, it would be well to remember that a majority of younger voters cast ballots for Richard Nixon in 1968. For the umpteenth time in a row the predicted upsurge of youthful American voters did not turn out in 2008. Just as the MSM gets it wrong (lies) about US politics, it may be they are spinning wishful tales about Iran. Whether Iran's election was honest or Chicago style, it is none of our business.
Outlasting the Ayatollahs — will to truth
June 16th, 2009 at 3:36 am
[...] source [...]
IndigoRain
June 16th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Buchanan is correct; the United States should stay out of Iran's affairs. Meddling in any way just gives the regime an excuse to blame Americans and the West for its problems, thus diverting attention from a mess of its own creation. Of course, Obama, like so many presidents before him, will want to use all the power that a leader of a superpower has to muck about and stir the pot. What will be his or his country's reward; blowback, maybe not today or tomorrow, but meddling inevitably leads to blowback.
ProJustice
June 16th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
This article assumes that the election was fraudulent, yet even the mainstream media admits there is no evidence to back up such an accusation.
Antiwar.com Blog · I Love the Smell of Vindication in the Morning
June 16th, 2009 at 9:35 am
[...] sure, he also links to a Pat Buchanan piece advocating nonintervention, saying he agrees “for now,” but that’s typical of [...]
Peaceful_Idiot
June 16th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
Careful Pat. Andrew Sullivan has morphed into a Rabid Freedom Feral and mentioned you as having the right advice "for now", per Antiwar.com blog:
http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/06/16/i-love-the...
IndigoRain
June 16th, 2009 at 11:03 pm
So Sullivan wants to be patient "for now" and then when he loses his patience what will he want to do? Have the US invade Iran? Or have ahmadinejad assassinated? Something must be done, uh, so long as Sullivan doesn't have to do the heavy lifting like volunteering his butt to fight the war he wants others to fight or actually being the guy who has to pull the trigger to kill someone. So much easier to bloviate and have somebody else do the dirty work. I guess that's why they call people like that chickenhawks.
Peaceful_Idiot
June 17th, 2009 at 12:37 am
Sullivan seems to have this weird pattern of behavior where he goes feral over something, lets his emotions get the best of him, and then does and says things he regrets and later apologizes or fesses up.
It's really weird. This whole thing in Iran is really weird. The right gets to rattle the saber at its favorite bogeyman, and the left gets to share its feelings on twitter with its fellow Freedom Lovers in Tehran. All that without even a mousefart about the hundreds of millions of dollars we've allocated to disrupt goings on over there, in the exact way that they are currently being disrupted.
And the Iranian Government reacted by disrupting telecommunications, which cut off the "reform candidate" (that from my reading sounds like a "free market" neoliberal plunderer) from his 40,000 Facebook fans. And for Obama to focus on keeping up appearances, to not be seen as meddling, tells me that we are meddling, and it is good, as long as it remains in the shadows.
And then there is the State Department urging sites like Twitter to postpone maintenance…
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13577_3-10265825-36.htm...
Gotta keep the propaganda line open to yegg central.
joeureneck
June 17th, 2009 at 2:51 am
Yes, Buchanan's idea rests on the claim of fraud although he is smart enough to know there is no basis for it. His argument, depending solely on a belief/hope that the Iranian government has no legitimacy, is that of a shallow 'non-interventionist'.
gromansky
June 17th, 2009 at 4:24 am
Pat Buchanan said what? Who would expect him to agree with anything Obama does? Yet here he is, adding a reasoned call for measured patience. Anyone who can favorably evoke both LBJ and Ronald Reagan in the same posting should be OK, but sometimes Buchanan drives me nuts.
My compliments to the posters; Great info here.