Evidence of meeting #106 for Subcommittee on International Human Rights in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was iran.
A video is available from Parliament.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
1:45 p.m.
NDP
Cheryl Hardcastle NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
I'd like to thank our witnesses for bringing some very thought-provoking information to us today. We're well aware of the human rights abuses in Iran. I just want to continue on the conversational roll with Mr. Dubowitz.
You're talking about targeted sanctions and how we need to take these bolder steps now that we have our legislation in place. I guess I'll ask both of our witnesses if we can maybe have a little bit of candour from you, as we've already heard, with regard to the universal period review. Do you think that, if we're targeting in a different way or in a more vigilant way, we'll see a different response to recommendations that are put forward by the review? I think sometimes when we're following this issue we get cynical about the processes that are in place and the responsiveness. I'm wondering if you think it would be helpful or meaningful for the review to be something that is actually responded to.
1:45 p.m.
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, McGill University, As an Individual
There is the cost-benefit calculus to human rights violations. Human rights abuses are an instrument by which the regime holds on to power, and an aspect of that power is military force and violence. Another aspect is the economic power and privileges of the inner circle. The question is, how can we ensure that abuses exact a cost?
The universal periodic review, I would say, is a sort of softer, less intrusive means of persuading Iran to improve its human rights record, but targeted sanctions exact a far higher cost. I think the regime would be much more responsive if it understood, in regard to very specific categories of violations, that they will pay a price, and that the price will be very direct and tangible.
Just by way of example, Ms. Khalid spoke about women's rights in Iran. Iran probably has the most vibrant feminist movement in the Middle East. Most of our human rights heroes are women such as Shirin Ebadi, Narges Mohammadi, who is in prison, and Nasrin Sotoudeh. The issue is not that people need to be educated in Iran, but that women need to be empowered, and they need to know that, when they are put in prison because they protested against compulsory hijabs or whatever the case may be, this issue will exact a cost in Iran's pursuit of its diplomatic and economic interests. I would go back to what my friend Mark has said about targeted sanctions.
1:50 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
If I could just flesh that out maybe more specifically, imagine a woman is put in jail, in Evin prison, for taking off her hijab, and we're able to determine who is responsible for that decision to put her into prison, to torture her, and to abuse her, and we identify that individual who's responsible for the repression. Now the question is, what do you do about that? Well, there's a name-and-shame element, which is to call out this individual and make sure we broadcast that far and wide.
Practically speaking, here are some of the things we can do to that individual. The first thing we can do is impose a travel ban. This would be a travel ban that means that individual cannot come to Canada. There would hopefully be a U.S. travel ban. We could hopefully work with our European friends on a European travel ban.
The question is, how do you enforce a travel ban, and how meaningful is it? If you attach secondary sanctions to that travel ban, then all of a sudden, you've created a situation where, if that individual tried to fly into Ottawa, Washington, or Berlin, then those sanctions could be applied against the company that is refuelling their plane. How do we know that works? When Foreign Minister Zarif landed in Frankfurt, as a result of sanctions, no private fuelling company would refuel his plane. This is the foreign minister of Iran. The German government had to order the German military to go and refuel his plane, so imagine the complications that this can cause.
You can have some real, practical impact. I mentioned financial sanctions. These are men—generally men—who not only want to travel abroad, but they want to move their money abroad. They want to move their money into safe havens, because they know, given the rial-dollar exchange rate, they may become increasingly poor if they keep their money in rials, so they want to do it in U.S. dollars and euros. Imagine if, as they are moving their money, we target those financial transactions, and we freeze those assets. We make sure that they can't launder their money through the Vancouver or Toronto real estate market or real estate markets in Europe and abroad where they're doing this.
These are the practical effects of targeted sanctions, and these are the kinds of sanctions that make a real difference, which you have the authority to impose as Canadian government officials.
1:50 p.m.
NDP
1:50 p.m.
NDP
Cheryl Hardcastle NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Maybe somebody else will take up this, but one of the things we haven't really talked about here—and I think it's an important component, without getting too philosophical—is education and post-secondary education, the education system, Canada's role in international development and opportunities that we could be maximizing there, and what the realities are on the ground right now. It would be helpful to hear a little bit about that from either of you, or both.
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
1:50 p.m.
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, McGill University, As an Individual
I'm not sure what you have in mind in terms of education. One of the problems is that Iran sees civil society as a threat. Iran has a very vibrant civil society. It's a youthful population there who are Internet-savvy. They're cosmopolitan, but they are severely repressed, they're imprisoned, and they're intimidated, so that is part of the problem. Development-type efforts all have to be filtered through the Revolutionary Guards and through the religious foundations, and that very seriously circumscribes what can be achieved.
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
Marwan Tabbara Liberal Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON
Thank you all for coming here. We're quickly running out of time, so I will try to be as quick as I can.
Most states that we discuss here in this committee have either been failed states or states with the same types of human atrocities that are happening in Iran, but I notice that Iran is different, as it's the largest economy in the Middle East and North Africa. The GDP is $412 billion, as Mr. Akhavan mentioned. However, Mr. Akhavan, in your testimony, you said that there's a 30% unemployment rate and 33% live below the poverty line.
With a country, as compared to the countries we've studied in this committee, it seems that.... As you mentioned corruption is very rampant. The funds I just mentioned right here aren't going to the people. I think you're seeing a lot of corruption at the top. With that come all these human rights abuses.
What can we do, as Canada, as a state, or with other states that have engaged with Iran on other talks, for example the U.K., France, China, and Russia? That's externally.
Internally, within civil society, how can we start developing more talks, so we can see a lot of these funds directed to the people, so they can flourish and have better prosperity in their country?
1:55 p.m.
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, McGill University, As an Individual
That's a very good question for which there is no easy answer. Some years ago, before this subcommittee, I spoke about the Islamic Republic of Gangster Capitalism. There is an inextricable relationship between giving economic incentives to religious and security elites and their vested interest in repressing all dissent and ensuring that they maintain power.
The economic situation is a direct reflection of the lack of transparency and lack of accountability. In the long term, without a democratic transformation, it will be very difficult to persuade the regime not to spend billions of dollars in Syria and Iraq or to let it go into the pockets of regime insiders.
Having said that, I think that there are ways of reaching out to the Iranian people. There are outreach strategies, where the Canadian government can invest resources in efforts to empower civil society. With the age of the Internet, there are many creative possibilities. Canada can persuade the European Union, in particular, which has strong commercial interests in Iran, to raise issues of transparency and accountability. There are a range of softer and harder measures which could be taken, but once again, I go back to the role that Canada has played as one of the biggest money-laundering centres for regime insiders. I think we need to take a long and hard look at how we have been accessories to this extreme corruption and take measures against it.
1:55 p.m.
Liberal
Marwan Tabbara Liberal Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON
I will pass on my remaining time to Mr. Fragiskatos. Before I do, I think external and internal measures would put a lot of pressure on the regime. I think that's how we can move forward on that.
1:55 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
Thank you very much.
Mr. Dubowitz, my question is for you. Like all my colleagues around the table, I share a real concern about the human rights situation in Iran, but I'm also concerned when the argument is made that regime change ought to be the focus in Iran.
We have seen what regime change meant in Iraq in 2003 and what it meant for the people of Iraq from a human rights perspective, but also the wider region.
Can you comment on the following? You wrote along with Reuel Marc Gerecht for Bloomberg a few years back. This is what you said—and I quote this also, in light of the fact that you're counselling the Canadian government to take a stronger approach, when it comes to imposing sanctions on Iran.
You said, as follows:
If we are going to pursue tougher international sanctions against Iran, and we should, the goal should be regime change in Iran not stopping proliferation. In fact, regime change would make the idea of an Iranian bomb far more tolerable.
Can you explain what you mean by that?
1:55 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
When I talk about regime change, I talk about the regime change that Payam was talking about.
1:55 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
I'm sorry to interrupt you. To be clear, you've advocated for regime change in a number of forums: The Wall Street Journal, Slate, theYnetnews—
May 1st, 2018 / 1:55 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Correct. Many times. I can give you the whole list.
1:55 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
We can talk afterwards. There's a whole long list.
Of course. At the end of the day, the only hope for the people of Iran, the only hope for the security of the region, and the only hope of mitigating the nuclear and missile threat to our homeland is that there has to be the end of the regime. That's not just me saying that, that's many Iranians saying that.
I subscribe to the Shirin Ebadi view of regime change, which was articulated in Bloomberg a few weeks ago when the Nobel Prize laureate and human rights lawyer said that there can be no regime transformation, there can only be regime change. What she called for is a secular constitution. She called for a referendum to get rid of the office of the supreme leader. She made it very clear that Hassan Rouhani and Javad Zarif, the so-called moderates, are incapable of actually bringing about the kind of positive changes for Iran—
2 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
It's 2 p.m. and I don't mean to interrupt. With all due respect, do you not see how, in advocating for regime change, you ignore the view that regime change would—not even arguably, almost certainly—completely destabilize Iran and pose all sorts of terrible human rights consequences for the people of Iran and for the wider region?
In counselling the Canadian government to impose stronger—
2 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Sir, I think you're—
2 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
—sanctions on Iran, you're actually advocating, because of your arguments, that Canada come on board with a view to replacing the regime in Iran, which is quite concerning to me. If Canada was to go down that path, we would see the entire region destabilized. We're focused on human rights here. Human rights would really be undermined.
2 p.m.
Liberal
2 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Thank you.
I think you have a conception of regime change, understandably so, of 500,000 mechanized U.S. troops invading Iran to take down the regime. I don't support that form of regime change. I opposed the Iraq war and I would oppose an Iran war of U.S. invasion.
I support the change of the regime as Shirin Ebadi, a Nobel Prize laureate, supports it. I support the change of regime that hundreds of thousands of Iranians, who were on the streets over the past couple of months, have actually called for. I support a peaceful transformation and a peaceful—
