Rice to Ask for $75 Million to Promote Democracy in Iran

phoenix80

Banned
By JOHN O'NEIL
Published: February 15, 2006

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told a Senate panel today that she plans to ask for $75 million to promote democracy in Iran, but she met with sharp questioning from Democrats about whether Bush administration policies were promoting the rise of anti-American governments around the world.

Ms. Rice told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the money for Iran, on top of $10 million already provided in the current budget, would be used to "support the democratic aspirations of the Iranian people," and to counter the influence of Tehran's new hard-line regime.

"No one wants to see a Middle East that is dominated by an Iranian hegemony, particularly one that has access to nuclear technology," Ms. Rice said, and she later called Iran "our biggest single strategic challenge" in the region.

She said in her prepared statement that the extra $75 million "would enable us to increase our support for democracy and improve our radio broadcasting, begin satellite television broadcast, increase the contacts between our peoples through expanded fellowships and scholarships for Iranian students, and to bolster our public democracy efforts."

The bulk of the money, $50 million, would go toward establishing a round-the-clock television broadcast into Iran in Farsi, according to a state department official, along with improvements to radio and satellite broadcasting.

"The regime's policies are risking the total isolation of Iran, and the people of Iran shouldn't suffer from that," Ms. Rice told the Senate panel.

Ms. Rice and other members of the administration have stepped up their criticism of Iran in recent weeks, pressing for United Nations sanctions over its nuclear program and blaming the government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for fomenting violent protests over the publication of satirical cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad.

But the focus on Iran today also reflected a sense that its standing has grown as the region has changed in recent years, with a friendly Shiite-dominated government preparing to take office in Iraq, Hamas winning elections for the Palestinian Parliament and radical groups like Hezbollah and the Egyptian Brotherhood making gains in votes in Lebanon and Egypt.
Senator Joseph R. Biden of Delaware, the panel's top Democrat, said that any sanctions on Iran that included an embargo on purchases of its oil "would have a dramatic, dramatic negative impact."

Senator Chuck Hagel, a Nebraska Republican, called Iran "the most powerful country in the Middle East" and "the most difficult."

Mr. Hagel noted that the Iranians have the American military at their doorstep in Iraq and Afghanistan and that there are countries in the region — in Israel, India and Pakistan — that have nuclear weapons.
Mr. Hagel praised the administration for working closely with the International Atomic Energy Agency in seeking to rein in the Iranian's nuclear program, calling it was a change from the dismissive attitude that prevailed before the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

"I hope we are now past the Chalabi days of relying on that crowd or that kind of policy," he said, referring to Ahmad Chalabi, the former Iranian exile leader whose group provided much of the information about Iraqi programs to develop weapons of mass destruction that was later found to be false.
In response, Ms. Rice said that "Iran is pursuing policies in the Middle East that are, if not 180, 170 degrees counter to the kind of Middle East that we would build."

But she said that she "would not overstate Iranian influence, by recognizing that it is diluted by a number of other forces and factors that are deeply suspicious of Iranian influence and Iranian power."

Ms. Rice said that harsh comments by Mr. Ahmadinejad since taking office last summer have "crystallized the concerns of the international community, "because he speaks in blunter ways about Iranian ambitions than did prior Iranian governments."

She acknowledged that Iran was likely to have close ties with the new, Shiite-dominated government of Iraq, but said she would be traveling to the Persian Gulf region to talk with leaders there about countering Iranian influence.

She said that the in the long run the rise of democracy in the Middle East would work to the Iranian theocracy's disadvantage, but she ran into sharp criticism from some senators, particularly Democrats.

Senator Barbara Boxer of California cited international polls that she said showed America's low standing in world opinions, and tied them to gains made by unfriendly parties in Venezuela and Bolivia as well as the Middle East.

"There are times when elections turn out in ways that we would prefer that they had not," Ms. Rice acknowledged. But she said that giving people a chance to make free choices was preferable to a policy that denied them that freedom.

The victory by Hamas, she said, has posed " a difficult moment in the prospects for peace." But, she said, "the Palestinian people got a chance to go to the polls and express their desire for change."

"I don't think our policy can be that you can only have elections if you are going to elect candidates who we favor," she said.

Senator Lincoln Chafee, a Rhode Island Republican, countered, "if we don't talk to the winners, I think that's a problem."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/15/politics/15cnd-rice.html?hp&ex=1140066000&en=371353db702a1646&ei=5094&partner=homepage

-------------------------

Do you think it is enough to overthrow the theocratic regime in Iran by this little amount of money?
:|
 
Where are they gonna get the money from? There is already a dent in the budget, and this will cost lots more when the regime change took place.
 
depends much on the way of promoting...
so she thinks 75 millon bucks is enough to run a war?
 
EOD said:
depends much on the way of promoting...
so she thinks 75 millon bucks is enough to run a war?

No, it is not about war. It is about promoting civil society organizations and democratic movements inside of Iran
 
phoenix80 said:
No, it is not about war. It is about promoting civil society organizations and democratic movements inside of Iran

See also: Coup d'etat :mrgreen:
 
phoenix80 said:
No, it is not about war. It is about promoting civil society organizations and democratic movements inside of Iran

well, I understood that but was just a bit sarcastic...
 
Paying people to do a democratic regime change...... it almost sounds like a contradiction in terms to me! Unless the majorty wants a change of course.....
 
Ted said:
Paying people to do a democratic regime change...... it almost sounds like a contradiction in terms to me! Unless the majorty wants a change of course.....

LoL

Wake Up!

Majority of Iranians want a change
 
Ted said:
Paying people to do a democratic regime change...... it almost sounds like a contradiction in terms to me! Unless the majorty wants a change of course.....

Think it was more meant to be a support for the democratic movement, not about people being payed, this is not the first time the US does that and certainly not the last.
By the way, Russia just recently put new laws on financial control of NGOs and their financial sources and forbids finacing from abroad. All that after the Russians lost their butt kissing regimes in Georgia and Ukraine (and the Russians tried hard not to lose them and even attempted killing the opposition leader) which both were getting the support for democracy mentioned above. Means the Russians are afraid of something like that to happen to themselfes - just good, they know they are wrong and they are in fear... Hope Russia will have a democracy one day.
 
just good, they know they are wrong and they are in fear... Hope Russia will have a democracy one day.

Being unpopular and wrong are not the same. Sometimes you'll have to take measure that are far from popular, but very necessary. At that instant you could overthrow any regime anywhere.... if you spent the money wisely.
And my second point (although not very relevant in this thread) should one want a democracy anywhere in the world. Is democracy always the best option?
 
And my second point (although not very relevant in this thread) should one want a democracy anywhere in the world. Is democracy always the best optio

Shut it ted the red! :)

No, democracy isnt working for the middle east lets just let them have their theocracys.
 
Throwing good money after bad isn't going to change the Iran government one bit. The people want what the people want and all the money in the world won't change that.
 
Rabs said:
Shut it ted the red! :)

No, democracy isnt working for the middle east lets just let them have their theocracys.

Lol Rabs, I missed your sharp and observant remarks lately! Or... did you need that long to think about your comment!!! :rock:
 
Rabs said:
Shut it ted the red! :)

No, democracy isnt working for the middle east lets just let them have their theocracys.

Disagreed there.

Then why is your government trying to promote democracy in Iraq or Afghanistan?
 
Lol Rabs, and people say republicans don't have humor..... well, that proves them wrong!!
 
Ted said:
Lol Rabs, and people say republicans don't have humor..... well, that proves them wrong!!
:rolleyes: Take a close look at who is sitting at the desk in the oval office and then (with a straight face) try to tell me that the Republicans don't have a sense of humor.
 
Promoting Democracy In Iran

VOA News
Editorial
23 February 2006

President George W. Bush has asked the U.S. Congress to allocate an additional seventy-five million dollars in 2005 to promote democracy in Iran. Congress has already allocated ten-million dollars. Part of the additional funds will be used to expand radio and satellite television broadcasting to Iran.

"Iran is a country that is going one-hundred-eighty degrees in the other direction in terms of democracy for its own people," says U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice:

Perhaps one of the biggest challenges we face is the policy of the Iranian regime which is a policy of the destabilization of the world's most volatile and vulnerable region. It's not just Iran's nuclear program. It's also their support for terrorism around the world. They are, in effect, the central banker for terrorism around the world.​
Promoting democracy and respect for human rights in Iran, says Ms. Rice, "is an important thing to do":


The Iranian people deserve better. This is a people who are connected to the outside world. It's a great culture. They are great people and they deserve to be able to govern themselves." Ms. Rice says the U.S. will also expand educational exchanges with Iranians. At its height in the 1970s, a peak number of fifty-one thousand Iranians studied in the United States. That figure is two-thousand today. The U.S. "must change this," she says, and the U.S. "is beginning a new effort to dramatically increase the number of Iranians who can come to America, the number of Iranian professionals who wish to visit.

The U.S., says Secretary of State Rice, "will actively confront the policies of the Iranian regime, and at the same time we are going to work to support the aspirations of the Iranian people for freedom in their own country."

The preceding was an editorial reflecting the views of the United States Government.
 
Back
Top