Beware of arming strangers!

Submitted by Daniel Hershtal (Israel), Jul 12, 2007 at 05:05

The idea of regime change in Iran has been a tempting solution to the problems Iran is causing. However, one must think at least twice of the consequences of unleashing the beast of revolution.

America armed the Islamists in Afghanistan in the 1980s with the theory that they would be better than the communists. The KLA in Serbia has turned out to be just as bloodthirsty as the Serbian regime it was helped to defeat. Do we really know enough about these "Mujahadeen" - a scary name for members, even if they do let women wear t-shirts - to give them arms and an international forum from which to operate? Even if they promise to back away from Nuclear technology, can we trust they won't build up the program again quickly from this regime's hidden reserves?

Even if we do think that MEK are angels-among-men, can we guarantee that once they topple the current regime that they will come out on top? Iraq and Afghanistan both seem to show that peace-loving democrats don't fair so well in a battle-ridden environment. As is often the case, a revolution begins with Rousseaus and Voltaires and ends with Robespierres and Napoleans. Pacifists generally don't fair well in international politics, especially in the Middle East.

I urge the US to take decisive action against Iran, but supporting and arming lesser-known opposition groups may cause worse problems for the Persian people, and the world, in the very near future.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".