Since stronger sanctions are likely to cause Iranians to rally around a regime they dislike, would a better approach be to allow Tehran to continue on its present course without sanctions, and trust the Iranian people to topple the unpopular regime? As risky as this sounds, Le Monde columnist Caroline Fourest writes that of all the available options, this is the most likely to succeed.
For Le Monde, Caroline Fourest writes in part:
Sanctions will do nothing but bind the Iranian people to a regime they no longer want. Tehran has already found a slogan to depict it as a champion of nuclear reduction, while continuing to work furiously at escalation: “Civil nuclear power for everyone, military nuclear power for no one.” The logic is compelling but of course contains a hidden flaw. Everyone greatly doubts that Barack Obama will press the nuclear button. But no one can trust Mahmoud Ahmadinejad not to.
This man, who believes he is God’s chosen, has renounced all rationality. From him, one can only hope for the worst. But he’s not alone in governing. He’s just a pathetic puppet in the hands of the supreme leader and an assembly of more experienced mullahs who are above all, divided.
It isn’t a question of trusting in the “wisdom” of this tyrannical regime, but of betting on its demise. In an ideal world, the green movement would have brought the regime to an end and the issue would no longer arise. In the world that is ours, the shackles of this regime have yet to pop open – but are holding on by just a thread or two. Sanctions can restore them, whereas the realization of this nuclear danger may instead make them crack. It’s a very risky bet. But have we any other choice?
READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, your most trusted translator and aggregator of foreign news and views about our nation.
Founder and Managing Editor of Worldmeets.US