Middle East Digest: March 14, 2008Bureau of Public Affairs From the Daily Press Briefing of March 14, 2008: QUESTION: Anything smart to say on Iran? QUESTION: Anything smart to say on Iran? You said this morning you’d have something smart to say on Iran? MR. MCCORMACK: I think I had something smart to say on Iran in the morning, just more smart things. QUESTION: Okay. MR. MCCORMACK: Well, what we’re going to do is we’re going to issue a statement once the polls have closed, as they are, in Iran and I think that is some – scheduled to be sometime in the afternoon, our time, here on the East Coast. So we’ll have some statement about the election itself. It is fair to say and comment on the run-up to the election that the government acted in such a way to deny equal access and open access to those who are running in opposition to the regime, that those running in opposition to the regime were subject to intimidation. And that is just the number who actually made it through the government-controlled vetting process. As in past years, there were a large number of individuals who wished to run for office, registered to run for office, yet were denied the opportunity to run for office by the government. That is quite unfortunate and certainly is something that undercuts democracy in Iran as it is. And fundamentally, regardless of the results of the election and the outcomes of the election, which we shall see, I suspect, in the days ahead, real power in Iran is concentrated in an unelected few. And that does not constitute a real thriving democracy and that’s unfortunate for the Iranian people because they are the keepers of the great culture. And the world would benefit from having greater interactions with Iran. They would benefit from the Iranian people to fully be able to express themselves not only on matters of politics and art and culture, but also on the way that they are governed. Sadly, they are denied that right under the current regime. QUESTION: You’ve given quite a sort of damning description of the run-up to the election. MR. MCCORMACK: Right. QUESTION: So does that mean that because of the run-up to the election, that people who wanted to be on the ballot couldn’t be? Does that -- MR. MCCORMACK: Right. QUESTION: -- indicate that this cannot be a free and fair election? MR. MCCORMACK: Well, it certainly is one that does not give the Iranian people the full slate of choices that they deserve. So, you know, in essence, the results -- whatever they may be and whatever the processes are and how they are judged on election day, in essence, the results are cooked. They’re cooked in the sense that the Iranian people weren’t able to vote for a full range of people. It’s – you know, essentially, they’re given the choice of choosing between one supporter of the regime or another supporter of the regime. They weren’t given the opportunity, in a very large number of cases, to be able to choose somebody or vote for somebody who may have had different ideas from the regime. So that speaks to the elected portion of the regime in Iran. And as I said, and as I would stress again, the willpower in Iran is held by an unelected few. At the top of that power structure is the – I think what they refer to as their Supreme Leader. Again, this is – if you look at it, these are not the constituent elements of a thriving democracy and that’s a shame for the Iranian people, that they are denied the ability to choose truly who will lead them and to be able to freely express their choices through the ballot box as well as through other means. QUESTION: So if you’re saying the election – the results are cooked, then you’re saying it’s a sham, basically? MR. MCCORMACK: Well, again, I constructed a response there, so you have to look at all the elements of the response. We will have a final statement coming out after the polls are closed. We’ll have a comment on the actual electoral process itself. QUESTION: Sean, did you have a chance to check with your bureau about that incident of bombing in the tribal area? MR. MCCORMACK: Oh, I did not. I'm sorry. We'll post an answer for you. QUESTION: Okay. But today, again, there are reports by the media that missiles are falling in the tribal area, so if you could check that also. MR. MCCORMACK: We will post an answer for you, indeed. QUESTION: Thank you. QUESTION: Please, anything further on reaction to Petraeus, the failure of the Iraqi Government to take advantage of the opportunities provided by the surge? MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah. I looked into this a little bit, and check with MNFI and General Petraeus' folks. But I think it's their argument that the characterization of General Petraeus’ words in the newspaper wasn’t quite what either he intended or what he actually said. But I’ll let you check with him on that point; basically, that there was a mischaracterization there. I think, generally speaking, the view of the United States Government is that the Iraqis have made use of the time that they have had with the reductions in levels of violence to try to move forward the political process. It’s undeniable that they have made progress there. Can they and should they continue to press forward as rapidly as they possibly can on the remaining significant outstanding political issues? Absolutely, and that’s what we continue to urge them to do. Could they have done more during this period? It’s conceivable, yes, but their political process is moving along. They’ve passed the budget, they have passed a so-called de-Baathification law, they have passed a law with respect to provincial powers and provincial elections. Their hydrocarbon – there’s a hydrocarbon law and other issues that are on – still on the – on the dock and they need to move forward with those, not for – not for our benefit, ultimately, but for the benefit of the Iraqi people who elected these individuals to do the business of the Iraqi people to help build those democratic institutions that will serve as a foundation for the future Iraqi state – the Iraqi state of the future. |
 | |||
|
