Friday, 20 November 2009


That was the promise President Obama made to the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran in a statement released from the White House on the 4th November, 2009.

Whilst talented and enlightened medical graduates, such as Dr Ramin Pourandarjani, are being slaughtered in the prisons of Iran, for refusing to aid and abet a state cover-up, Obama promises not to 'interfere' with Iran's internal affairs. Whilst unarmed peaceful protestors are being beaten with batons and shot dead by government enforcement bodies, Obama promises not to 'interfere'.

It is the International Community's duty to 'interfere', let alone involve the President of a super-power, by virtue of Article 55(c) of Chapter 9 of the United Nations Charter, whereby the universal respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms will be promoted. Shooting dead protestors, such as Neda, constitutes extra-judicial executions, which is a violation of Article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as Article 6(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966. One is hardly promoting human rights if they are not 'interfering' in its violations.

If Mr Obama is truly concerned about the human rights situation in Iran, and opposes the blatant violations of the human rights laws, why is he attempting to fool the world with his distracting show-gestures, such as silently dedicating his Nobel Peace Prize to Neda Agha-Soltan, when he has the power to outright condemn the IRI authorities for the barbarity and blatant violations of human rights? The United States and the rest of the international community have the authority to bring the systematic and widespread human rights violations before the Human Rights Council and refer it to the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court. However, no such action is taken.

Obama pledges that the "United States of America wants to move beyond this past, and seeks a relationship with the Islamic Republic of Iran based upon mutual interests". Obama has the intelligence and power to reject Ahmadinejad's presidency, but instead he offers such a relationship. As if this is not enough of a blow to the struggle for human rights in Iran, Obama pulls the plug on funding the Iran Human Rights Documentation Centre. Is this a move to appease the IRI government and its Iranian traitors, such as Trita Parsi?

It is as if the notion of human rights is being annihilated by the very same politicians who claim to advocate its protection.


  1. Some have argued that I have taken this statement out of context; however, here is my logic:

    You see, I am all in favour of Obama calling for peace, negotiations and justice for the Iranian people. But he did not need to go that extra step and say he will not interfere. He could have preserved the dignity of his statement, calling for peace and justice and negotiations without having to add that he will not interfere in Iran's internal affairs. By saying that, it seems that they are leaving the people of Iran unsupported.

    To call for peace and justice for the people is a form of interference. So by saying he will not interfere is like pulling his punches when he call for peace and justice for the Iranian people.

  2. What do you expect him to say? That he will invade Iran in support of the Green Movement?

  3. What do you expect him to say? That he will invade Iran in support of the Green Movement?

  4. Anonymous, you are right. I should not expect Obama to outright support the people of Iran, because that would be a lie, for the only green movement he and his predecessors support is the movement of money - from outside countries into their bank accounts :))

    When he speaks about justice for the Iranian people, and peace, he certainly back-tracks on those ideals when he promises not to interfere...

    In any event, the Iranian people should be under no illusion, they themselves are the ones who have any real power in bringing the change they want in Iran. To wait in hope of some foreign government assistant would be futile. Maybe the U.N. will get around to enforcing human rights in Iran, one will have to wait and see what the outcome of the U.N. General Assembly's 64th Session will be. If that past performance of the U.N. is anything to go by, the mighty paper tigers will send another roar at the IRI government, but without the bite that is needed.

  5. To the person who said "what do you expect him to say, that he will invade, etc.": that completely misses the point. Obama and his subordinates comment on other country's affairs all the time -- and make demands, too. When he did comment - in late June - he refused to use the term "murder"; he lied about facts (e.g., he described 'security' forces as firing shots , to disperse crowds, when they were and are shooting AT people; he praised Khamenei as a mediator when it was Khamenei who had banned demonstrations starting on June 13th and who consistently condemned demonstrators as outside the system, as manipulated by the mythical forces of Zionism, and who praised those beating them, describing the latter as the victims. Both Obama and Clinton described US policy as "reaching out" to Ahmadinejad, when that phrase suggests extending a sympathetic gesture to a troubled friend or relative. And Obama went silent on the murderous anti-people terror starting at the end of June, and has refused to EVER mention it since. (The pope has also been silent, though he too routinely comments on everything; e.g., he and Obama have actively intervened regarding Honduras.) This "what do you want him to do, invade" is an attempt to confuse the issue and silence criticism. Since when are human actions limited to either a) invading or b) first grossly downplaying state terror and then going silent about it, while pleading with the state terrorists to meet with you about other issues?

  6. Jared Israel, you honour my blog with your informative and insightful comments.

  7. I am honored to receive such a compliment! Thank you for having this blog. In fact, thank all Iranians who by their courage and thought have changed the discourse (a much abused word!) in our much abused world.

    Also, I was wondering if you knew anything more about Kobra Babei? Am I correct that she is still slated to be murdered on Dec. 2?

  8. Jared - I have looked into any news and there are no updates as yet. One might infer that she is still alive and still 'slated to be murdered [barbarically] on Dec.2'...

  9. well written mehertash... Obama is busy bending to barbarics and shaking hand with terrorists. WAKE UP OBAMAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!