As Iranian protests approach their one-month anniversary, the regime increasingly appears willing to take a page from the Syrian government’s playbook by unleashing tremendous violence. Public sources suggest casualties are now in the hundreds, but as the regime turns off cellphone and internet access, there is no knowing what is going on in smaller towns and faraway provinces. It is clear, however, that ordinary civilians are beginning to fight back against the security forces and paramilitary Basij.
That the regime has lost its legitimacy among the broader Iranian public is without doubt. Leader Ali Khamenei has made instilling revolutionary values in “the youth” a frequent theme of his sermons. It did not work. The September 2020 execution of 27-year-old wrestling champion Navid Afkari on trumped-up charges dating back to the 2018 anti-government protests showed just how frightened the Iranian regime was of any charismatic figure from the younger generation around whom ordinary Iranians might rally.
BIDEN SENDS GIFTS TO HEZBOLLAH
For many in the West, however, there was a third way: They embraced the idea that regime ‘reformists’ truly wanted a more progressive future. Think tank analysts and academics attended Track II dialogues, never questioning whether those with whom they talked had real power or were sincere. Journalists traveling to Iran amplified the voices of those who sought a change in regime style, not its substance. It was a quid pro quo for access. Whether out of naivete, ideology, or ambition, many diplomats embraced the notion that reformism was real. This was the case a decade ago when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s aide Jake Sullivan began secret dialogue with Iranian officials in Oman. His logic? Rewarding reformists might tip the balance of Iranian power in their direction.
In reality, it did the opposite. Reformism always represented a cynical good cop to the leader and Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ bad cop. While diplomats applauded then-President Mohammad Khatami for his “dialogue of civilizations” and European countries justified tripling trade with Tehran in the idea that it would encourage reform, the Islamic Republic built up its secret nuclear program. The head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council directing the hard currency windfall to such secret programs at the time? Hassan Rouhani, whom the same diplomats and academics described as a moderate if not a reformist.
Now, as regime thugs murder young women in the street and execute protesters behind bars, what is noticeable is what has not happened: None of the reformist diplomats who for so long cultivated Western scholars, officials, or journalists have defected or denounced the regime’s actions. Perhaps it would be too much to expect from some trapped in Tehran, but those serving in Paris, London, or New York have no excuse: If they resigned their commission in protest, they could seek political asylum and become a voice for change. In reality, however, their silence and inaction are telling.
When push comes to shove, the reformists always supported the Iranian theocracy and were willing to excuse its worst excesses. For an American to endorse the Islamic Republic’s reformists is to play into the regime’s hands by being a useful idiot. The only way in which Iranians will achieve freedom is to change their regime. If foreigners are not willing to help with strike funds, communications, and moral support, the least they can do is stay out of the way. It is time to put the myth of the reformists to bed.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Michael Rubin (@mrubin1971) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential. He is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
