U.S. Moves Toward Regime Change Policy in Iran

No, the State Department isn’t using those words, but it’s asking for $85M for broadcasts and for unnamed dissident groups:

“We are going to begin a new effort to support the aspirations of the Iranian people,” Ms. Rice said at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “We will use this money to develop support networks for Iranian reformers, political dissidents and human rights activists.”

. . . .

The American aid announced by Ms. Rice is to include $25 million to support “political dissidents, labor union leaders and human rights activists” and to work with nongovernmental organizations outside Iran to build support inside the country. The administration plans $50 million to increase television broadcasting to 24 hours a day all week in Farsi into Iran. Another $5 million is aimed at bringing Iranian students and scholars to study in the West, and $5 million more is earmarked for setting up Internet sites. But American officials acknowledge that getting Iran to agree to send students and scholars to the West for purposes of political change will be difficult.

Does this delayed onset of coherence have implications for North Korea?  Point of fact:  Iran’s dissident movement is probably  light years ahead of  any opposition  inside North Korea.  In both cases, it could take years for a dissident movement to  challenge the ruling regimes.  The Bush Administration has two years left, its power will continue to decline, as tends to happen with administrations during their second terms, and there is no telling what the next administration will do.

A dissident movement need not fill the streets or lead a rebel army into the capital to influence events, of course.  The growth of a dissident movement could create fissures within the regime, substantially weakening its leadership and possibly leading to a coup, or to a power struggle that would bring more moderate leadership to power.  A similar strategy ultimately proved effective in bringing down a series of Communist regimes in  Eastern Europe, where the ruling regimes  were intially backed by  all the resources of the Soviet Union. 

In other words, this is a very preliminary start to  a long process that should have begun after a policy review in 2001.  For this new policy shift, we can thank Iran’s zany new president  for empowering  advocates of regime change  in the U.S. government.  How brutal, intransigent, and mendacious will Kim Jong Il have to be to cause a similar result?