According to a report published today by the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, "Influential and well-informed members of Iranian civil society believe that military action against Iran would lead to further political repression, deeper enmity between the Iranian people and the United States, and severe humanitarian problems":

The 38-page report, Raising Their Voices: Iranian Civil Society Reflections on the Military Option, presents the viewpoints of 35 prominent Iranians living inside the country on the domestic consequences of an attack by the United States or its allies. These Iranians include human rights defenders, activists, lawyers, journalists, writers, leading cultural figures, and members of the political opposition.

Those interviewed in the report are people outside the ruling establishment, many having faced censorship, harassment, and imprisonment for their opinions or activities.

“The potential of a pre-emptive military strike has gone up and down over the years, but seems to remain an option. The Iranian civil society voices in this report consider such a foreign military strike an utter disaster for the human rights situation in their country,” said Hadi Ghaemi, the Campaign’s spokesperson.

The Iranians featured in the report rejected justifications for military action against Iran based on human rights violations, saying a strike would not precipitate “regime change” and would even rally some reform-oriented citizens to the side of the government. One journalist who wished to remain anonymous said, “A foreign military attack would lead to many of the [Green] movement’s rank-and-file shifting their support to the same government they currently oppose.”

This is very much in keeping with past statements from Iranian democracy activists like Akbar Ganji and Shirin Ebadi, both of whom have warned that U.S. or Israeli strikes on Iran would be a death blow for their movement. In an interview last November, Ebadi told me that a U.S. attack “would give the government an excuse to kill all of its political opponents, as was done during the Iran-Iraq war.” For that reason, the Iranian government probably “wouldn’t mind the U.S. throwing a missile at them,” she said.

UPDATE: Ali Gharib has more.



Subscribe to Middle East Progress Alerts

Support Middle East Progress

In-Depth Coverage

Original Commentaries

Setting the Record Straight

Determined to Reach a Common Objective

“We knew at the outset that the task would be difficult. We acknowledged that publicly and privately. We knew this would be a road with many bumps— and there have been many bumps—and that continues to this day. But we are not deterred. We are, to the contrary, determined more than ever to proceed to realize the common objective, which we all share, of a Middle East that is at peace with security and prosperity for the people of Israel, for Palestinians, and for all the people in the region. We will continue our efforts in that regard, undeterred and undaunted by the difficulties, the complexities or the bumps in the road.”—George Mitchell, special envoy for Middle East peace, remarks with Prime Minister Netanyahu, September 29, 2010

Middle East Analysis

Upcoming Events

The U.S. Agency for International Development and Conflict: Hard Lessons from the Field

May 17, 2011, 12:00pm – 1:15pm

From Afghanistan and Iraq to Pakistan, Somalia, and South Sudan, the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, is engaged daily in trying to help some of the most troubled nations on the planet make a lasting transition to stability, open markets, and democracy. Few areas of the agency’s work are more challenging or more controversial.

Join us for remarks by, and a roundtable with, the deputy administrator of USAID, Ambassador

more