Experts Support Obama’s Response to Contested Iranian Election
Tuesday, June 23rd, 2009By Mariko Lamb- Talk Radio News Service
Nick Burns, former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, countered critics who have described Obama’s response to the allegedly fraudulent election in Iran as overly passive. Instead, Burns said that Obama was “sensible” and “handled it superbly.”
Mounting evidence has suggested that the results of the recent Presidential election in Iran, which resulted in the apparent re-election of former President Ahmadinejad, suffered from fraud. The newly surfaced evidence includes: millions of extra ballots that were printed but unaccounted for, a refusal to use mandated see-through ballot boxes, a refusal to monitor ballots, and voting stations running out of ballots early despite being given an overabundance of blank ballots.
“I don’t have any doubt that it was a stolen election,” said speaker Abbas Milani, Director of Iranian Studies at Stanford University, in a discussion on the United States’ response to the Iranian elections Tuesday.
Karim Sadjadpour, former Chief Iran analyst at the International Crisis Group, said the elections were fixed by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini because “a Mousavi Presidency and an Obama Presidency at the same time would make it very clear to everyone that Ayatollah Khomeini is the impediment that is standing in the way of U.S.-Iran relations.”
Burns said, “[Obama] has been very thoughtful, measured–you’ve seen that his statements have become progressively stronger in line with events.” He continued to praise Obama for not “playing politics with the issue at home” and maintaining his focus on hopes of diplomacy between the U.S. and Iran instead of succumbing to domestic criticism.
