Regimentation

The US has zero moral authority to want to tell the Tehran regime to behave itself or be nice to its own people

- Harish Khare

SOON after missiles stopped flying between Israel and Iran, US President Donald Trump condescended to declare himself satisfied that there was no longer any need for a “regime change” in Tehran. Earlier, he had demanded “total surrender” from Iran’s rulers, failing which the Americans would ensure a change of regime in the Islamic Republic. A huge threat. Magisterial arrogance.

All this glib talk of ‘regime change’ was a throwback to the days of the so-called ‘Arab Spring’. Not long ago, the world was witnessing the barricades being breached in Tunis’ November 7 Square, the siege at Cairo’s Tahrir Square, and the confrontation in Manama’s Pearl Square. We had our own little flutter at Jantar Mantar under Anna Hazare’s nominal leadership.

Those were heady days when dissidents were flirting with insurrection; challenging the rule of the old, corrupt, and despotic. The new technology of mass information was being creatively deployed to manufacture solidarities and unity of purpose among the sullen populace. In particular, the “Arab Street” was brimming with hope and defiance. Suddenly, every established state order seemed vulnerable to the dynamics of a “regime change”.

A change of regime, of course, was not a new concept. Imperial powers like Britain were routinely getting rid of uncooperative rulers in the Middle East, without any qualms in using coercion and force to bring about a new set of sultans and amirs in this or that protectorate in the Gulf region.

After the Second World War, the Americans were intervening militarily in country after country, on the pretext of making the world safe for democracy. On its part, the Kremlin was not averse to sending tanks to Budapest and Prague to quell uprisings and to ensure compliance and submission from fellow-comrades in supposedly independent countries.