National Endowment for Democracy and Iran’s faux dissidents

March 18, 2008 at 10:11 pm (democracy promotion, faux democracy promotion)

An interesting post by Yoshie of Critical Montages.

However, I don’t agree with her conclusion about “winning Iranians over for gender equality” — If anything, the Americans lefties and so-called feminists, have to be won over towards understanding Islam – the Americans leftists and feminists have little or nothing to offer the world. They have not been able to stop the war that has killed a million in Iraq, and are now backing a reactionary liberal imperialist man called Obama, and a liberal imperialist woman, Hillary Mrs. Clinton, as their savior.

Please keep your winning overs to yourselves, you have nothing of worth to be won over to — but do continue to expose these fraud dissidents – you do that well.

The National Endowment for Democracy, in its tireless effort to give democracy a bad name, initiated a project called “World Movement for Democracy” in 1999. The project’s acronym, WMD, may very well be a bad inside joke among the guardians of the empire today.

On WMD’s steering committee sits Mahnaz Afkhami, President of “Women’s Learning Partnership for Rights, Development and Peace.” One of WMD’s projects is “International Women’s Democracy Network,” whose “secretariat [is] to be housed at an existing network with a substantial trans-regional membership, currently the Women’s Learning Partnership.” Iran must be close to the heart of this circle.

Afkhami, the first Minister for Women’s Affairs under the Pahlavi regime, is naturally a friend of Reza Pahlavi, the son of the deposed Shah, who has not given up on the dream of restoration and is busily trying to organize Iranian exiles, not just monarchists but also leftists and separatists, in a vain attempt at regime change (Connie Bruck, “Exiles: How Iran’s Expatriates Are Gaming the Nuclear Threat,” New Yorker, 6 March 2006). What does Afkhami say about the former crown prince? “He’s a regular guy” (qtd. in Franklin Foer, “Reza Pahlavi’s Next Revolution: Successor Story,” The New Republic, 3 January 2002). That says everything about the kind of world she lives in.

more here


Permalink Leave a Comment

Akbar Ganji

December 12, 2007 at 1:12 am (faux democracy promotion, Faux Iranian Dissidents)

Last week, Akbar Ganji received the annual award from Right and Democracy (or International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development), a Canadian government-funded organisation which is known to be the Canadian version of the American National Endowment for Democracy.

In his speech, he openly called for Western government’s support to spread democracy and human rights in Iran, according to the Persian version of his speech, published by Dutch-funded ‘pro-democracy’ projects, Rooz Online and Radio Zamaneh.

Read more here

See also “Who is Akbar Ganji?”

Permalink Leave a Comment

Woodrow Wilson Center works with NED and Hoover Institute on Iran

September 15, 2007 at 9:22 am (faux democracy promotion, Think Tanks)

Woodrow Wilson Center is the faux think tank that the recently released faux Iranian dissident Esfandari works for.

September 2, 2007

[The Woodrow Wilson Center] is continuing to engage in joint venturing with other institutions around the country and overseas – joint venturing that is mutually beneficial and that extends the reach and the effectiveness of the Center’s work.
Examples include:

numerous Latin American Program conferences co-hosted with a variety of Latin America-based institutions on such topics
as Haiti, Cuba, US-Mexican relations, and peace building in Colombia;

The Kennan Institute working with four major American foundations on a conference in Russia on civil society and its important role;

Middle East Program conferences with the Hoover Institution on Iran, with USIP for Iraqi women, and with the National Endowment for Democracy on Islamism and democracy in Muslim countries;

and the convening of a number of university groups, business groups, and nongovernmental organization representatives with government officials from several agencies to assess the balance between access and security and to discuss current visa issues and a myriad of problems getting foreigners into the United States.

via Hossein Derakhshan’s blog.

Permalink Leave a Comment

US funding of Iranian “dissidents”

June 23, 2007 at 9:38 pm (faux democracy promotion, Faux Iranian Dissidents, Think Tanks)

This article in today’s New York Times Magazine is worth a read because it details the names of faux Iranian dissidents, and the think tanks involved in psyop against Iran. While the article quotes some faux dissidents as not wanting to have anything to do with the US funding — the reason for this refusal has little to do with principles, and a lot to do with the fact that the Iranian government is onto the US sponsored counter-(soft) revolutionary interventions.

As a senior adviser to the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, David Denehy is charged with overseeing the distribution of millions of dollars to advance the cause of a more democratic Iran. Affable, charming and approachable, he is bearlike in stature and manner. His voice is pleasantly rumbly; his smile is so wide that it seems to have been drawn onto his face with a crayon. Over the last two years, Denehy has canvassed dozens of pundits, students, journalists, bloggers and activists across the world about how he might best go about his work — what he calls, echoing President Bush, “the freedom agenda.” He has shaken hands with millionaire exiles, dissidents, monarchists, Communists, self-styled Mandelas and would-be Chalabis. He is the public face of “the democracy fund,” as it has come to be known, or simply “the $75 million.”

click here to read more.

Permalink 1 Comment

democracy promotion funding

June 16, 2007 at 12:09 am (faux democracy promotion, Faux Iranian Dissidents)

This article, from the Financial Times, does a positive spin to the counter-revolutionary activities of the so-called “pro-democracy” groups in Iran.  The reality is that, if one looks at any of these groups even with just a low powered reading glasses, we get to see the real motivations, and loyalties – that are primarily towards making Iran into a pro-US country, with its very own loyal to America puppet regimes. But still an interesting article to read – as it openly admits to the role of American $$$ that are being used to promote puppet groups within the Islamic Republic. 

The US allocated $66.1m (€50m, £34m) in 2006 to promote democracy in the Islamic republic. Most of the money was for organisations outside Iran including the Washington-based Voice of America TV but $20m was earmarked for activities inside the country.

Recipients remained anonymous unless they chose to reveal the funding themselves.Critics in Tehran and Washington, including some within the US administration, allied governments and prominent NGOs, say this secret funding is damaging Iran’s NGO movement and the few US organisations working openly with Iranians, such as the Woodrow Wilson Center and the Open Society Institute.


Permalink Leave a Comment

A whose who in the faux democracy pomotion movement

June 10, 2007 at 10:57 pm (faux democracy promotion)

Jim Lobe has a couple of good articles on Neo-Con targeting of Iran. I do not agree with him on some points, where he suggests that certain faux dissidents are “real” even though they are hanging out with the US neo-con anti-Iran soft and hard (counter) revolutionists. No self-described “dissident” can possibly be considered legitimate while they are collaborating with such an atrocious crowd.

However, he has linked to some fascinating documents on two recent conferences of the (faux) “democracy promotion” crowd.

The first one, sponsored by the Foundation for Defence of Democracies, was in Bahamas, and specifically focused on Iran.

You can read the agenda of that conference here

Articles and papers from the Bahamas conference can be read here

The second one was sponsored by the Prague Security Studies Institute (PSSI), the Adelson Institute for Strategic Studies at the Likudist Shalem Center in Jerusalem, and Spain’s Foundation for Social Studies and Analysis (FAES) headed by former Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar.

The conference program can be read here

A list of the conference participants can be read here – worth reading over a few times, so that next time you see their names associated with this or that (faux) “dissident” you’ll know what is going on…

Also check out this photograph (from their web site) titled “dissident round table” – more like puppets wannabes.

Permalink Leave a Comment

International Conference on Democracy

June 10, 2007 at 10:05 am (faux democracy promotion, Faux Iranian Dissidents)

Among the participants at Prague’s International Conference on Democracy and Security were Reza Pahlavi, a son of Iran’s autocratic shah who was listed as an “opposition leader to the clerical regime of Iran,” and Farid Ghadry, often referred to as Syria’s Ahmed Chalabi. Many other invitees, including Richard N. Perle, were leading U.S. neoconservatives and Iraq war advocates.

Permalink Leave a Comment

Promoting ‘Democracy’ through Civil Disobedience

June 7, 2007 at 11:07 pm (faux democracy promotion, Think Tanks)

The two authors of A Force More Powerful are Peter Ackerman and Jack DuVall. Linking both writers to the ‘democracy promoting’ community is fairly straightforward as the overt nature of most ‘democracy promoters’’ work means that the authors feel free to openly publicise their ‘democratic’ affiliations on the internet. Dr Ackerman is the founding chair of the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict (ICNC), chairman of Freedom House, and a member of the U.S. Advisory Council of the United States Institute of Peace (USIP). [8] His coauthor, Jack DuVall, is the president and founding Director of the ICNC, and is also a founding member of the Arlington Institute. [9]

The ICNC, of which both Ackerman and DuVall are founding directors, describes itself as “an independent, non-profit, educational foundation that develops and encourages the study and use of civilian-based, nonmilitary strategies to establish and defend human rights, democracy and justice worldwide.” [10] Yet as will become clearer later, the name of their organisation belies its actual unstated objective, which is to help promote revolutions in geostrategically useful countries. Bearing this in mind, it is not surprising that most of ICNV’s principals of nonviolence were trained within the heart of the military-industrial complex: ICNV Vice-chair Berel Rodal, was formerly Director-General of the Policy Secretariat in the Department of National Defence; ICNV Manager of Educational Initiatives, Dr. Maria J. Stephan, has worked “at the U.S. Department of Defense and with the international staff at NATO Headquarters in Brussels”; and Shaazka Beyerle (former vice-president turned Senior Advisor of ICNV), is a founding Vice President of the European Institute.

more here

Permalink 1 Comment

Chavez accuses US of soft-coup

June 7, 2007 at 12:19 am (faux democracy promotion, from the Iranain press)

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has accused the United States of trying to orchestrate a soft coup in his country.

Chavez said the US has been triggering soft coups in various countries by provoking people and with the help of media and organizations, under the pretext of protecting human rights, Chavez said at a news conference in Ayacucho Hall of Miraflores presidential palace on Wednesday.

They are trying to do the same in Venezuela, he added.

He stated, however, that what the US leaders have overlooked is the fact that Venezuelan people fervently support the tenets of democracy in their country.

The outspoken president predicted that his people would frustrate the enemy plots thanks to their awareness.

“Sirs, forget about your plan here in Venezuela. What could eventually happen is a revolutionary outburst. We do not want it to happen. However, in that case, I would be at the forefront. If this ever happens -and I will make a great effort for this not to occur- the government would join the people and lead the revolutionary outburst. Therefore, you would rather stop it.”

Referring to the Americans’ egotism and expansionism, Chavez criticized them for exerting control over 20 percent of the globe’s energy reservoirs, despite housing only five percent of the world’s population .

However, people in many countries are living in pain and misery, he regretted.

Spanish speakers should also check out this Tele Sur interview:

La CIA utiliza el método del golpe suave manejando las emociones del pueblo, afirma periodista Thierry Meissan.

(The CIA uses the method of the soft coup, manipulating the emotions of the people said (French) journalist Thierry Meissan. )

Permalink Leave a Comment

fermenting counter-revolution in Iran: brooking institute

May 30, 2007 at 8:48 pm (faux democracy promotion, Think Tanks)

The nature of the regime is at the core of the challenge it poses, but the starting point of a counter-strategy is containment: that is, George Kennan’s classic vision of bringing countervailing pressures to bear against a revolutionary power’s external expansion until the structural contradictions within the system begin to weaken it internally.

Iran is not mainly an American problem; it is a challenge in the first instance to our allies and friends in the Middle East. Thus, the first stage in a counter-strategy is to bolster Arab allies and friends as counter-weights to Iranian power. While military cooperation with some Gulf Arabs, especially Saudi Arabia, is controversial at home, tightening American links with these allies is logically the core of such a strategy.

A wider strategic consensus may be emerging that would join the United States, key Arab states, and Israel against the Iranian threat. This should be nurtured. Arab countries have other options, including their own nuclear development, or appeasement of Iran. Far preferable is that they retain confidence in us as a reliable friend and protector.

Restoring this balance needs to include:

some success in stabilizing Iraq

broader use of economic pressures (as opposed to the narrowly targeted sanctions resorted to thus far)

stepping up support of civil society in Iran, including improving the quality of U.S. official broadcasting into Iran

more on the Brooking Institute

Permalink 2 Comments

Next page »