Consider Ceaușescu

American Thinker ^ | 27 Jun, 2025 | Stuart Creque

[MtnClimber]

On Christmas Day in 1989, the people of Romania held a long-awaited ceremony that was more joyous than any Nativity had been in decades. They held a spontaneous trial of President Nicolae Ceaușescu and his wife Elena, found them guilty of capital crimes against the Romanian people, and sentenced them to death. There was no shortage of volunteers for the firing squad, and those lucky enough to be chosen didn’t wait for the order to fire: they riddled the Ceaușescu’s bodies with more than one hundred bullets.

The story of how the dictatorial couple met their end has important lessons for those wondering about the fate of today’s Iranian Islamic Revolutionary government. What caused the Ceaușescu regime to collapse and how did the people overcome the power of the dictatorship?

In 1989, the Soviet sphere of influence was in total upheaval. The people of East Germany tore down the Berlin Wall, the people of Poland defied their Communist government, and the leader of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, renounced the Brezhnev Doctrine that had held the Soviet Union had the right to use military force to keep Warsaw Pact nations communist. Instead, he asserted, “Any interference in domestic affairs and any attempts to restrict the sovereignty of states -- friends, allies or any others -- are inadmissible.” This became known as the Sinatra Doctrine, because now each Eastern Bloc state could run things “my way.”

One of the triggers for this period of upheaval was the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster. Beyond the economic cost of containment and decontamination, estimated at US$18 billion in 1986 dollars, the event also punctured the Soviet Union’s façade of technological superiority. This blow to Soviet prestige was compounded by the withdrawal in defeat from Afghanistan, confirming the hollowness of Soviet military doctrine.

---

TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: iran

[MtnClimber]

I hope the Iranian people can overthrow the mullahs, but I am not holding my breath.

[NorseViking]

You certainly shouldn’t. Imagine, how things would have been if NATO bombed East Bloc in 1989.

[norwaypinesavage]

"watch for protests to break out among the Azeris and Kurds in the northwest, the Arabs in the South, and the Baloch in the east. When they demonstrate that their fear of the regime no longer outweighs their desire for freedom, even if the regime brutally puts down their protests, their willingness to stand up for hope may inspire the Persian plurality. If that comes to pass, the people of Iran may work as one to throw off the oppressive medieval theocracy"

To me, the odds don't look very good for that.

[blackdog]

Islam is submission. The Islamic state believes it has a godly duty to make you submit to it. The people know nothing else by large.

[Dr. Franklin]

Putin could meet a similar fate.

[BobL]

“If that comes to pass, the people of Iran may work as one to throw off the oppressive medieval theocracy and claim their country’s birthright as a DEMOCRATIC and PLURALISTIC society.”

It NEVER happens that way, as country after country with centuries-old gripes have shown. One would think that the Neocons could someday LEARN THAT LESSON. There will be a ‘strongman’, he may be friendly to us...or may not be, but there WILL be a strongman.

In any case, what emerges is unlikely to be nearly as bad as the Mullahs, so I wish Iran luck, but who knows - popular revolutions are virtually impossible to predict.

[Robert DeLong]

Because a large enough segment of the population have been sold communism, under the name of socialism, while denouncing capitalism as being evil.

They have even offered up that Jesus would have supported socialism, while at the same time claiming that Christianity is full of hatred, sexism, & racism.

It's called the divide & conquer method of warfare.

The divide and conquer method of warfare is a strategic approach used to weaken an opponent by creating divisions among them, preventing them from uniting against a common enemy. This method involves breaking down a larger group into smaller, less powerful factions, making it easier to manage or defeat them individually.

One of the most insidious of them is what we are now seeing with illegal alien invaders.

It is even creating division on this board, as some here now complain about the optics of removing these illegal invaders.

The previous one concerned the Ukraine/Russia conflict, which created divisions of support that used valuable resources to protect the borders of Ukraine from the evil Russia & Putin, all while our president had thrown the gates of America wide open to all comers regardless of who they were. That didn't matter for it all accomplished the same goal.

Continue the destruction America from within. Both require more money to be spent in a nation that was already severely in debt because our leaders were only interested in filling their own coffers, while the citizens become more indebted and the nation slid further into turmoil, disrepair and the unsustainable debt kept growing like a monster out-of-control.

The divisions grew even deeper as a result.

It has worked well, has it not?

[pierrem15]

The Poles and the Czechs managed to remove their Communist governments without violence, and the East German state simply dissolved once it became clear its rule would no longer be backed by Soviet force and the wall was opened to West Germany.

I would not expect such an easy removal of the Iranian theocracy, but its worth noting that there is a non-trivial group of Shia clerics opposed to the theocracy. And unlike Afghanistan or Iraq, Iran actually has a semi-functioning state bureaucracy.

In any case, replacement of the mullah regime will be (mainly) up to the Iranian people.

[bert]

My view is that at present, the Mullahs are not the problem. The problem for Iranian citizens is the military and other armed groups established by the Mullahs. They will not surrender their power and will not put their own lives at risk.

The Crown Prince has declared himself King Of Iran and is seeking to develop new governance to take political control. His plans must include some bones to be thrown to the military to encourage them to desert the Mullahs and embrace the new governance.

The King says he does not want to rule. He wants to be the leadership during the transition

[MeneMeneTekelUpharsin]

It is headed full-bore towards a civil war.

[Robert DeLong]

I certainly hope not, but if it must, it’s best that it happen under Trump.

[NorseViking]

You probably missed my point. If NATO started to bomb East Europe in 1989 there is a fat chance that they’d remained anti-Western. That is why you shouldn’t expect pro-Western Iran.

[pierrem15]

A lot depends on what would have been bombed and why.

A campaign against the Communist governments would have been welcomed by many.

[NorseViking]

Really? The US is divided between conservatives and liberals. How many would actively support a foreign attack on a sitting regime?