Ideas Rain

We at the Shadow State Department support this open letter to the people of Iran.

To show our support for the Iranian people, we each have agreed to display this letter, in English and in Farsi, on our pages from sunrise to sunset today, Tehran time.

We are not politicians, nor are we generals. We hold no power to dispatch diplomats to negotiate; we can send no troops to defend those who choose to risk their lives in the cause of freedom.

What power we have is in our words, and in our thoughts. And it is that strength which we offer to the people of Iran on this day.

Across the diverse and often contentious world of weblogs, each of us has chosen to put aside our differences and come together today to declare our unanimity on the following simple principles:

- That the people of Iran are allies of free men and women everywhere in the world, and deserve to live under a government of their own choosing, which respects their own personal liberties

- That the current Iranian regime has failed to create a free and prosperous society, and attempts to mask its own failures by repression and tyranny

We do not presume to know what is best for the people of Iran; but we are firm in our conviction that the policies of the current government stand in the way of the Iranians ability to make those choices for themselves.

And so we urge our own governments to turn their attention to Iran. The leaders and diplomats of the world's democracies must be clear in their opposition to the repressive actions of the current Iranian regime, but even more importantly, must be clear in their support for the aspirations of the Iranian people.

And to the people of Iran, we say: You are not alone. We see your demonstrations in the streets; we hear of your newspapers falling to censorship; and we watch with anticipation as you join the community of the Internet in greater and greater numbers. Our hopes are with you in your struggle for freedom. We cannot and will not presume to tell you the correct path to freedom; that is for you to choose. But we look forward to the day when we can welcome your nation into the community of free societies of the world, for we know with deepest certainty that such a day will come.

We concur that UNWRA should aim to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem with respect to terrorism. We do not see this as an effort to embarrass the U.N., but an attempt to get it to focus on its proper peacekeeping mission.

The election of Syria as head of the Security Council is an issue that must be addressed. Here is an article suggesting that in order to fight terrorism, the United States might have to declare war on the UN.

We need to postpone the speech on a Palestinian state. Instead, we should re-think the issue of whether it is possible for an Arab and a Jewish state to live peacefully in such close proximity.

This week, there were a few voices of moderation on the Palestinian side. Some prominent Palestinians took out an advertisement in which they argued against suicide bombing. Edward Said also criticized the tactic. Evidently, there are Palestinians who want self-government more than they want to kill Jews.

Putting his finger into the wind, Yasser Arafat seemed to reconsider his opposition to the Camp David proposal. However, his historical behavior suggests that once he feels free to return to militancy that he will do so.

It would be desirable to encourage the moderates. However, the problems with recognizing a Palestinian state while the radicals still operate freely were pointed out by Fred Barnes and by Charles Krauthammer.

As long as the radicals hold sway, there may be no diplomatic solution. That is the pessimistic outlook of Steven Den Beste, expressed here and here.

If you give a speech that recognizes a Palestinian state, we are at risk of falling into a dangerous pattern.

"U.S. to Palestinians: We will recognize a state if you agree to stop attacks against Israel. Do you agree?"

Palestinians to U.S.: "No."

U.S. to Palestinians: "W-w-w-well, er, um, we recognize a Palestinian state anyway. "

This approach would suggest that we do not have the patience or the fortitude to confront the exterminationists. Instead, the best way to support the moderates is to crush the radicals.

It is important to confront the exterminationism that exists in the Muslim Arab world. Columnist Jonah Goldberg points out the strong connections between Arab anti-semitism and Nazism. This Egyptian academic conference that focused on the destruction of Israel is an example.

We say that we are not at war with Islam. But what if Islam is at war with us? Eric Raymond warns thatmoderate Islam is a mirage.

Sooner or later, we will have to define the enemy not as "terrorism" but as violent Islam. As long as we fail to confront them, the Islamic radicals will believe that they can destroy Israel and destroy the West. To end terrorism, we need to demonstrate the falsity of that belief. When we say that "we are not at war with Islam," the Muslim world takes that as a sign of fear.

The key to peace in the Middle East is not satisfaction of Palestinians, but confrontation with the Saudis.

The ugly history of Saudi behavior and American accomodation is outlined in this Congressional testimony by Daniel Pipes. This needs to change in order to bring about a dynamic that favors peace in the Middle East.

As long as key Arab states remain backward, anti-semitic, and rejectionist toward Israel, diplomatic initiatives such as the proposal to declare a Palestinian state are useless. The only way that a declared state would change the situation is that it would make it illegal for Israel to undertake any action against terrorists operating out of the Palestinian area. This would give terrorists the incentive and the means to renew their operations.

The delusion of diplomacy was described recently in a speech by Charles Krauthammer. He says,

In the 1990's, America slept and Israel dreamt

Today, some in America still dream that there is a diplomatic formula that will end terrorism. This dream is dangerous.

America's interests, including our interest in peace, are promoted by spreading peace and democracy. From now on, we will bring this goal to the forefront of our foreign policy. See Free the 400 Million.

We are forwarding to you this request from Congressman Tom Lantos for an inquiry into the United Nations Relief Works Agency. It is important to understand what the UNRWA knew about the terrorist infrastructure in Jenin.

From now on we will want United States representatives to participate in UNRWA missions. We want to make sure that UNWRA's actions are constructive toward promoting peace.