I read Editor: Myself, Hossein Derakhsan's Persian/English weblog. Hossein (or does he go by Hoder?) covers domestic affairs for the BBC and metablogs the Persian blogosphere. I don't believe bloggers and politics mesh with each other the same way in Iran as they do here (the consequences of speaking out are a little different), but they seem of a kind.

Last week I dined with Pedram Moallemian who blogs the eyeranian. He wants a secular Iran. I asked him what he thought America's policy on Iran should be. He answered:

• Respect the right of self-determination for Iran and Iranians.
• Condemn any possible military action against the people who are doing a great job fighting tyranny by themselves.
• Acknowledge big mistakes were made on both sides in the past and choose to move on towards a better relationship.

Tyrants ruled Iraq and Afghanistan. There was no meaningful chance for reform, no hope for self-determination. Do the people of Iran, at home and in diaspora, have enough faith in the current system and the system's ability to change incumbents? 

Pedram clearly does. He and others are drafting a new Iranian constitution. This is an ambitious exercise, imagining a new government that fits a whole people. It's an embrace of liberty worthy of Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. He wrote:

One of the bases for any true democracy is to accept the people’s prerogative to occasionally make wrong choices and even more often, to make choices that you and I may not like or agree with. But at the end of the day, the choice is completely theirs. By that I mean that if in a free and open election Iranians choose to keep the current regime, it would be vital for people like myself to value and honor their choice, yet reserving our right to oppose it in peaceful fashion and by non-violent means.   

Back to the three points...

Kerry is more likely to negotiate with Iran's government than Bush, but no President or candidate worth anything will rule out future options.

Israel is America's friend, and the threat of American force is part of what keeps it safe. Why rule out military action against a country who is still technically at war with a US ally? Some of the terror organizations that operate in Israel are funded by Iran. So there's a lot to work out between us, more than self determination.

Acknowledging mistakes on both sides, well, sure. Why not? Moving toward a better relationship? That's Motherhood and Apple Pie (at least in America). But actions speak much louder than words. Secular government that doesn't position America as Satan; defunding and disarming Hezbollah and other terrorists and turning them in to law enforcement authorities; acknowledging Israel's right to exist; and full women's suffrage would be great starts.

P.S. It seems both of our countries could do with a little more regime change and fairer elections.

P.P.S. Check out iranFilter, a collective blog/mefi system built by... wait for it... Hoder. More links, pithy. Overall source on internal reform, student life, American policy re: Iran. Now in beta.

P.P.P.S. My conviction is much greater than my influence within the Kerry campaign.

P.P.P.P.S. I had some naan with the tandoori lamb.  

[a klog apart]