SPEAKING
FREELY US
sanctions in Iran, victims at
home By Ahmed E Souaiaia
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times
Online feature that allows guest writers to have
their say. Please
click hereif you are interested in
contributing.
On the occasion of
the start of the Persian New Year (Nowruz), United
States President Barack Obama delivered a video
message to the Iranian people. In it, he
highlighted the many ways the Iranian government
denies its citizens access to information,
including censoring media outlets and filtering
the Internet. He declared that his administration
is committed to communicating with the Iranian
people despite the objections of their government
"by making it easier for Iranian citizens to get
the software and services they need to connect
with the rest of the world through modern
communications methods."
As a candidate,
Obama had insisted - despite harsh criticism by
other presidential
candidates- that he would reach out to the Iranian
leaders and talk to them in order to end the
30-year cold war. During his first year in office,
Obama offered to start a conversation with the
Iranian leadership based on mutual respect. He
then sent a letter, whose content was not
disclosed, to the Leader of the Revolution,
Ayatollah Seyed Ali Hosseini Khamenei. As his
first term in office ends, having failed to start
any significant dialogue with the Iranian regime,
the President outlined a new strategy designed to
bypass the government and talk to the Iranian
people directly. Will this strategy succeed?
Unlikely; and here are several compelling reasons.
Besides the fact that the video message is
representative of the predictable paternalistic
attitude towards people of the Third World, it
also underscores the casual approach to solving
one of the most critical international relations
problems of the century; a problem that has far
reaching economic, military, and political
ramifications on the entire world.
First,
it is neither diplomatic nor constructive to tell
citizens of another sovereign nation who their
leaders ought to be. If that was the norm as a
matter of foreign policy, the Obama administration
ought to develop a consistent standard by which it
decides how to judge foreign governments. In that
case, the US administration would also tell the
Saudis and the Bahrainis that their governments
are beneath the US standards.
Second,
although people-to-people interactions build
stronger and more lasting friendships between
countries, the Obama administration is instead
employing a government-to-people interaction,
which is a flawed and problematic approach. For
citizens' diplomacy to succeed, the administration
should enable and facilitate American citizens,
especially Iranian-Americans and
Muslim-Americans,to engage their counterparts in
Iran. This and the previous administration have
failed to rely on Muslim-Americans and call on
them to serve their country. Instead, the
administrations' inability to integrate Muslims
alienated many of them, and diminished the US.'s
credibility abroad.
A recent federal case
against an American charitable organization,
(United States of America vs Mehrdad Yasrebi and
Child Foundation, 05-CR-413 KI (Oregon)), reveals
the unfortunate state of Muslim-Americans, the
potential of citizens' diplomacy, and the legal
and practical problems with economic sanctions. In
the mid-1990s, Dr Yasrebi, a passionate
philanthropist, read a profile of an Afghan
refugee in Iran, Zahra, a girl who lost her father
at a young age. Her young mother abandoned her to
make a new life for herself. Zahra, then seven
years old, was living with her grandparents. Her
grandmother was disabled, and her old grandfather
could not find a job. He would hang around
construction sites every day collecting nails,
which he would straighten and resell for enough
money to feed his wife and granddaughter. The
three lived in a cardboard box the size of a mini
van. This and similar real life stories moved Dr
Yasrebi to act. He founded the Child
Foundation (CF), a US-based charitable
organization dedicated to helping needy children
in Iran (his ancestral home), Afghanistan, and
other countries where he had reliable, trustworthy
contacts. He and his wife initially ran the
organization from his residence. He built the
organization from nothing. First, he asked friends
to donate US$20 a month, all of which he promised
would go to providing food, shelter, clothes,
books, and healthcare to needy children. He and
his wife covered the overhead cost of the
organization out of their own pockets. He also
placed small donation boxes in retail stores. He
asked long-distance phone companies to donate a
percentage of the bill for international calls
placed by individuals who purchased a calling plan
with the companies. He reached out to the
Iranian-American community and asked them to
support his cause. After a decade of hard work,
the CF became a large and reputable US charity
providing critical services to thousands of
extremely needy but talented children from Iran
and several other countries. Dr Yasrebi still
recalls the joy he felt after receiving letters
from the many children he helped who are now
lawyers, professors, teachers, doctors, and
successful laborers enjoying a dignified life.
Since he insisted that the CF remain
independent, unaffiliated with any political
faction or religion denomination, the CF faced
difficulties operating in Iran and even collecting
donations from Shiite Muslims. Dr Yasrebi spent
considerable time writing letters explaining the
nature of the charity's work and asking religious
leaders to issue fatwas allowing their followers
to donate part of their alms to the CF. Because it
is an American organization, the Iranian
government, too, subjected the CF to additional
scrutiny and limitations. But none of these
obstacles measure up to what the CF, some donors,
and Dr Yasrebi have faced here in the United
States.
Because of the US sanctions
against Iran that date back to the 1980s, the CF
had great difficulty transferring funding and
services to children in Iran. The scrutiny
intensified after 9-11, and the CF and Dr Yasrebi
were subjected to secret monitoring, wiretapping,
and FBI-led profiling. Then in 2008, federal
agents conducted a synchronized raid at 6 am on Dr
Yasrebi's residence, his workplace, the office of
the CF, and the residences of several other major
contributors to the organization. The harsh raid
traumatized Dr Yasrebi's children and the negative
media coverage stigmatized his family.
After nearly seven years of intense
investigation, the government offered Dr Yasrebi
two options: a trial in federal court, where he
and his wife could face 20 to 25 years in prison
for a myriad of charges including "cooperating
with a terrorist organization," or a plea under
which Dr Yasrebi would admit to minor violations
and no charges would be brought against his wife.
On the advice of his attorney, Dr Yasrebi, fearing
for his liberty and the well-being of his family,
opted to take the plea. The government's
sentencing recommendation was a 30-month prison
term and a fine of $50,000.
During
sentencing, the defense attorneys argued that,
even after a decade-long investigation, the
government had failed to prove any of the charges
against the CF and Dr Yasrebi. They added that the
minor infractions to which Dr Yasrebi had admitted
did not warrant such a harsh punishment for a
well-respected member of the community. They
explained that the US administrations have
repeatedly stated that the sanctions were not
intended to punish the Iranian people, and
therefore food and medicine were exempted. The
attorneys asked the judge to reject the
prosecutor's sentencing recommendation and only
impose a fine of $10,000.
Responding to
the defense memo, the government insisted Dr
Yasrebi be imprisoned and heavily fined. The
prosecutors advanced shockingly troubling
arguments to justify their sentencing guidelines.
They contended that while food and other necessary
goods are exempted from the sanctions, providers
must not buy them inside Iran. They also contended
that the Child Foundation should not operate in
Iran at all because by providing for needy Iranian
children, the CF is making it possible for the
Iranian government to spend money on more sinister
projects.
Their insistence that charities
must purchase food and clothes from outside Iran
and then send them to beneficiaries inside Iran
rest on the idea that Iranian merchants and
businesses are linked to the government (perhaps
because they are paying taxes?). This line of
reasoning is both fallacious and cruel. These
specious arguments and flawed logic put the lives
and welfare of Americans at risk and give credence
to arguments used by extremists and authoritarians
to justify their indiscriminate acts of violence.
On March 6, 2012, Judge Garr King found
all of the government's claims that Dr Yasrebi's
work was a risk to national security unfounded.
Reportedly, Judge King concluded that "the
government hadn't produced evidence that Yasrebi
or the charity were involved in funding
terrorism." He refused to approve the prison
penalty recommendation proposed by the
prosecutors. While the judge's ruling more or less
vindicates Dr Yasrebi legally, the personal,
mental, and financial damage he, his family, and
the community have suffered is immeasurable. The
case increased Muslim-Americans' fears, anxiety,
and alienation. It also exposes the ugly impact of
economic sanctions on ordinary individuals abroad
and at home.
First, his employer,
Precision Cast parts, for whom he has worked for
nearly two decades, fired him. When he called a
headhunter to look for another job, he was told
that they cannot help him because he is an
admitted felon. After waiting 14 years to make a
decision regarding Dr Yasrebi's application for
citizenship, he was told that his application will
be denied because of the case against him. They
failed, however, to explain the 14-year delay,
which has placed Dr Yasrebi in a precarious
position. Had Dr Yasrebi been convicted of actual
crimes, he could have been deported and his
American-born US citizen children would have been
separated either from their father or their
homeland.
Second, the legal case
perpetuates a tormenting sense of fear and
alienation among Muslim-Americans. It cuts
familial bonds between Americans and their
relatives living in their ancestral homelands. It
creates classes of citizenship, allowing
naturalized US citizens to be treated as
second-class. It punishes Muslim-Americans for the
sins of the regimes they left behind.
Third, this case proves once again that
economic sanctions rarely harm regimes, but rather
destroy the fabric of society by imposing more
hardships on the poor, the needy, and the
vulnerable. Importantly, this case has exposed the
negative impact of sanctions on US citizens, legal
residents, and organizations. The prosecution of
Dr Yasrebi has had chilling effects on US
residents and naturalized citizens, especially
those with contacts in other countries. A
naturalized US citizen will be fearful of sending
money to an ailing mother in a country that is or
may in the future be under US sanctions.
Academicians will hesitate to collaborate with
colleagues in places like Iran and Cuba. Activists
will be reluctant to assist political prisoners
and human rights advocates in countries under
sanctions. NGOs will be unwilling to engage their
counterparts in places where their work on behalf
of the poor and the voiceless is most needed.
The United States vs Mehrdad Yasrebi and
Child Foundation case ought to be considered in
light of the case of American NGO workers arrested
and charged in Egypt after the revolution there.
If the American government continues to prosecute
its own citizens and legal residents for providing
aid to needy children in a Muslim country, what
claim (and credibility) could the administration
have now or in the future in helping Americans
targeted by less democratic regimes in Egypt,
Bahrain, Yemen, Pakistan, and other Muslim
countries?
In fact, the prosecution of Dr
Yasrebi on charges of violating US sanctions
against Iran by providing charitable work in that
country pales compared to the possibility of his
facing charges in Iran for being an agent of the
West. After all, Dr Yasrebi worked for nearly 20
years for a company that had significant business
deals with the US military. Naturally, given the
US's continuing military threats, the Iranian
government could argue that Dr Yasrebi is directly
providing the US armed forces with the technology
and the tools that will be used to attack Iran.
That is a far easier case to make than the one
leveled against Dr Yasrebi.
This case
exemplifies the risks and pain of unintended
consequences and puts human faces on the victims
of the sanctions that were supposed to punish a
rogue government, not its people or the people of
this country. The so-called targeted sanctions
presume that the other side will not adapt. The
reality is different and far more complex. A bank
that is not under sanctions today could be
tomorrow, and that complicates their business
relations. A bank under sanctions today may simply
change its name to escape them. Sanctions hardly
work to change governments' behavior. Citizens'
diplomacy is the alternative to sanctions and
military threats. It is effective, humane,
powerful, empowering, and constructive.
President Obama's declaration that he will
use American resources to provide Iranians with
access to the Internet while the US government is
prosecuting Iranian-Americans for providing food,
clothes, medicine, clothing and educational
materials to needy children flies in the face of
logic and common sense. His recent overture
towards the Iranian people should start here in
the US by empowering Iranian-Americans to speak on
behalf of the people of their adopted country, to
highlight its virtues, and to build bridges
between peoples.
If Obama wants
Muslim-Americans to continue to speak out against
brutal regimes in their ancestral homes, condemn
extremist expressions in Muslim societies, and
promote civil society and citizen-centered
governance in the Islamic world, then he must
start by making sure that Muslim-Americans are not
second-class citizens, that their citizenship is
not a bargaining chip, and that their loyalty will
not be questioned.
Obama can start by
ordering a review of this and similar cases to
make sure that the government did not break any
laws or violated any civil rights while
investigating and prosecuting such cases.
Furthermore, the delay in Dr Yasrebi's application
for citizenship, and the subsequent denial of that
application, should be investigated to ensure that
the same standard applies to all applicants, and
to establish that his application was not denied
because of his ethnicity, religion, or charitable
work.
Unlike other indictments where
terrorism charges were leveled, this particular
case did not receive national media
attention-possibly due to the extremely weak
evidence the government presented. But the
government's treatment of the defendants, the
nature of the charges, and the language used by
the prosecutors in the case documents examined for
this article underscore the interconnectedness of
domestic and foreign policy and the impact of this
connection on US citizens and the country's
standing in the Islamic world. It exposes an
undercurrent of mistrust and prejudice towards
Iranian Muslims. It depicts instances of willful
ignorance of Islamic cultures. It illustrates a
stunning disregard of the civil and constitutional
rights of Muslim-Americans.
Professor
Ahmed E Souaiaia teaches at the University
of Iowa. Opinions expressed herein are the
author's alone.
Speaking Freely is
an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest
writers to have their say.Please
click hereif you are interested in
contributing. Articles submitted for this section
allow our readers to express their opinions and do
not necessarily meet the same editorial standards
of Asia Times Online's regular contributors.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
