George Bush's 2005 State of the Union address contained a familiar (de)coupling, one which he been known to espouse elsewhere: a threat to the Iranian regime, "the world's primary state sponsor of terror" , and a gesture of assurance to the Iranian people that "America" stands with them in their pursuit of liberty.
I will be the last person who would argue that the ruling regime in Iranor any other place for that mattercan be conflated with the people of the country. But to radically de-link the people of Iran from their government in contexts such as the above is both disingenuous and dangerous. No matter how many photos we are shown of Iraqis under occupation stuffing ballot boxes with checks next to un-named candidates, or how often we see the stylish Karzai playing the role of the sovereign statesman, Bush's forays into Iraq and Afghanistan have reminded us of the obvious: though we may be able to tell the differences between people and states, bombs cannot.
Iranians, no matter what their political persuasions or stance towards the current regime, must adamantly reject any claims of so-called support which go hand-in-hand with calls to war.
And with this entry, my first contribution to the new anti-war co-blog, I will take my own advice and register my objection to any act of solidarity with the Iranian people which is based on violence against us