ID :
201927
Wed, 08/17/2011 - 14:43
Auther :
Shortlink :
https://oananews.org//node/201927
The shortlink copeid
Is Iran pleased about the violence in Britain?
TEHRAN, Aug. 17 (MNA) -- The recent protests in Britain have caused extensive damage to public property in London and other major cities like Birmingham, Manchester, Bristol, and Liverpool.
These actions are subject to condemnation and there is no argument in favor them.
However, many believe that the British government is calling the unrest rioting to deflect attention from the fact that it is a mainstream protest that is deeply rooted in decades of injustice, discrimination, and social despair and the failure to respect human rights standards.
The interesting point is that some of the leading English dailies, such as The Financial Times, claim that Iran is pleased with the current situation in the country.
Is this really so? Can a healthy mind really be pleased about people being injured and public property being damaged? It is not clear if the paper has any proof for such a claim.
The response by the Iranian government, parliament, and people to the recent incidents was meant to support the rights of minorities in Britain.
Iran has asked the British authorities to practice restraint and to conduct a dialogue with the protesters rather than suppressing them in an inhumane way. This stance cannot be interpreted as a stance of satisfaction. In fact, Iran is never pleased about violent confrontations between the people and police in any country on the planet.
However, the Iranian people and government cannot tolerate discrimination and a lack of respect for minority rights.
And this is happening in a country that claims to be a paradise for the integration of immigrants.
Using hidden cameras to identify the demonstrators is by no means acceptable.
Iran is not pleased with the way the protesters are being tried in overnight courts because they are deprived of access to proper legal services due to their economic circumstances.
All these human rights violations are being committed in a country that calls itself the standard-bearer of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Why is there no room to criticize the British government on this issue, although the country is always the first to criticize other countries for their human rights record?
What is the difference between protests in an industrialized country like Britain and protests in poor states in which the rioters resort to a call for democracy as a tool to disturb the public order?
But the British government is relying on international lobby groups in an attempt to escape from these serious charges.
So, does influence in international institutions give a country that claims to be an upholder of human rights license to commit violence against its poor citizens, who are also experiencing great discrimination? We hope not.
(By Mojtaba Sadeghian)
These actions are subject to condemnation and there is no argument in favor them.
However, many believe that the British government is calling the unrest rioting to deflect attention from the fact that it is a mainstream protest that is deeply rooted in decades of injustice, discrimination, and social despair and the failure to respect human rights standards.
The interesting point is that some of the leading English dailies, such as The Financial Times, claim that Iran is pleased with the current situation in the country.
Is this really so? Can a healthy mind really be pleased about people being injured and public property being damaged? It is not clear if the paper has any proof for such a claim.
The response by the Iranian government, parliament, and people to the recent incidents was meant to support the rights of minorities in Britain.
Iran has asked the British authorities to practice restraint and to conduct a dialogue with the protesters rather than suppressing them in an inhumane way. This stance cannot be interpreted as a stance of satisfaction. In fact, Iran is never pleased about violent confrontations between the people and police in any country on the planet.
However, the Iranian people and government cannot tolerate discrimination and a lack of respect for minority rights.
And this is happening in a country that claims to be a paradise for the integration of immigrants.
Using hidden cameras to identify the demonstrators is by no means acceptable.
Iran is not pleased with the way the protesters are being tried in overnight courts because they are deprived of access to proper legal services due to their economic circumstances.
All these human rights violations are being committed in a country that calls itself the standard-bearer of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Why is there no room to criticize the British government on this issue, although the country is always the first to criticize other countries for their human rights record?
What is the difference between protests in an industrialized country like Britain and protests in poor states in which the rioters resort to a call for democracy as a tool to disturb the public order?
But the British government is relying on international lobby groups in an attempt to escape from these serious charges.
So, does influence in international institutions give a country that claims to be an upholder of human rights license to commit violence against its poor citizens, who are also experiencing great discrimination? We hope not.
(By Mojtaba Sadeghian)
