|
|
|
Subject:
The Bush Effect
PPR
6/19/2009 9:05:25 AM
|
| There has been much talk about the "Obama Effect": the notion that because BO extended the hand of friendship to our enemies, our enemies would respond in kind by electing friendly leaders.
When Iran's vitriolic president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was re-elected, Obamers responded that his election could only be the product of fraud, since in a legitimate election a more friendly regime would have been elected. This notion shows a lack of understanding of the Iranian system, which was never a fair election. Even the "friendly" candidates in Iran are dangerous radicals hand-picked by the Council of Guardians. There may have been fraud, but it would not have mattered at all which dangerous radical was chosen.
Since the election there have been massive public demonstrations against the current regime, in spite of threats and violence. This unrest in Iran can rightfully be called the "Bush Effect". When President Bush established a democracy in Iraq, he did so in the knowledge that a democracy in the heart of the middle east would be a destabilizing force to every tyrranical regime in the region. Once established and consolidated, it would be a constant example to everyone that with courage and resolve a free people could overcome the tyrants.
People have been visiting Iraq from Iran ever since the invasion. They have seen the fighting and now they have seen a growing stability. Moreover, they have seen free elections and free speech. They now realize they too can have these things.
And now they are in the streets of Tehran demanding it. What will happen next? Will it be another velvet revolution or another Tiananmen Square? Who can say? Blood has already been shed. Whatever does happen next, it will only be the beginning. |
| |
|
|
|
