This question was generated by student Group C in Cold War Rhetoric, an undergraduate course in the Department of Communication at the University of Pittsburgh. The question was played for Karl Rove during his visit to a special meeting of the class on March 3, 2008.
In the students’ peer evaluation using a standardized rating rubric, Group C’s question received 15.32 total points (see breakdown of scores to the left); putting the group in sixth position in the question queue. To read student reflections on the encounter, as well as commentary about the students’ follow-up questions and how Rove handled them, scroll down to comments.
3 Comments | 
94. March 6th, 2008 Dina wrote:
Allow me to preface this comment by clarifying a few issues that may concern the reader after viewing our class’s videos and reading the follow-up reflections. The opportunity to speak to Karl Rove was arranged by a fellow classmate and presented as an optional assignment by our professor, Gordon Mitchell. After a consensus vote to arrange questions to present to Mr. Rove, the class was divided into groups to decide, independently, what those questions would be. The questions were also rated by the class in varying areas to determine the order in which the questions would be presented as well as filmed by students, with our professor only stepping in to aid in editing. At our meeting with Mr. Rove audio and video recording were not permitted and so all of his responses are either paraphrased from memory or by rough transcript of those who had foresight enough to bring computers.
Our group was interested in asking Mr. Rove his opinion on the classification of government documents, both old and new. Citing the recently declassified information pertaining to the 1953 coup in Iran orchestrated by the CIA to overthrow democratically elected Mohammed Mossadeq, we were curious as to how he would view the declassification of the documents in the Bush administration. His answer was fairly mundane, stating that he felt the declassification process within the past seven years has been good and that there is a push for declassification to proceed as quickly as possible. He mentioned that he felt the rule had been ‘blown-up’ by the media, referring to the power the executive branch maintains to keep documents classified if they are seen as a risk to national security.
A more interesting response was given to our follow-up question. In responding to Group A’s inquiry as to how the United States could go too far in dealing with another country, Mr. Rove stated that assassinating a head of state would be an example of such. Our group proposed the question that if assassination would be overstepping our bounds, what was his opinion on overthrowing a national leader, as was done in 1953. After a pause, Rove admitted that he had a mixed mind on the coup and overthrow of Mossadeq. He then went on to state that Mossadeq was a ‘very bad actor’ and a pro-Soviet actor who was constraining the freedoms in the country. Furthermore, Rove remarked that the Iranian people had many more freedoms after he was overthrown.
In the United States, our democratic elections are often cited as a key factor in our being a free nation. For Karl Rove to state the overthrowing a democratically elected leader provided a country with more freedom seems counterintuitive of what we feel as Americans. When Mossadeq was elected, he had gained support in large part because of his views that Iran should have more control over the oil that was being produced within their country. Overthrowing this elected leader and replacing him with Shah Reza Pahlavi was a clear benefit to the United States, as he was willing to cooperate with American demands. Needless to say, the Shah was not thought highly of by the Iranian people and is spoken of today as “one of the worst tyrants to ever hold a government spot in the Middle East” and “the Shah was more like a government Mafia”. This opinion is not a secret one and so it is interesting that Mr. Rove would still feel that Mossadeq could have possibly been limiting Iranian freedoms more than the U.S. appointed Shah. Certainly, should a similar incident occur within the United States, Karl Rove would be hard pressed to call it freedom.
See Also:
Executive Order 13292
New Times Coverage of Executive Order 13292
Arab Writer’s Group Blog
98. March 6th, 2008 Anon wrote:
Group C’s question concerned Executive Order 13292, an amendment to Executive Order 12958, regarding the classification of national security information. To paraphrase, Executive Order 13292 describes a uniform system for “classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information, including information relating to defense against transnational terrorism.” The order acknowledges that the democratic nature of the United States demands that its citizens be informed of all government activities, and encourages the free flow of information. At the same time, the order leaves provisions for certain information to remain confidential in the interest of national homeland security and the security of American interests abroad. The standard policy on the declassification of such material is that eventually all government documents will become declassified after 25 years. However, President Bush’s amendment allows for some documents to be classified indefinitely.
I believe that the notion of the government withholding information and keeping secrets is generally accepted to some degree by most American citizens to be a matter-of-fact process that comes natural in the sensitive business of running a country. If a baker, automobile manufacturer, or even married couple can maintain “trade secrets” it is an easy extrapolation to assume that a large and complex government institution would have to maintain its own secrets in the interest of operating smoothly and “getting the job done.” The problem is how to determine what information is okay to be kept classified and what information must be released in the interest of democracy and informing public opinion. Regarding this issue of transparency in the government, we asked if recently declassified knowledge of the 1953 CIA coup in Iran could have transformed the American public’s view and attitudes towards the Iranian nation if it had been made public sooner. Also, keeping in mind the president’s recent amendment to allow information to remain classified forever, we wanted to know how Mr. Rove, as the person in charge of President Bush’s presidential library, would strike a balance between ensuring that the American public is provided enough information to stay informed and intelligent, and remaining sensitive to the security needs of a nation at war.
In his answer, Mr. Rove first commented that the rate of declassification has been “good” over the last few years, and that the goal is actually for the documents to be moved through the declassification process as quickly as possible. He seemed confident in the current system, and seemed to suggest that eventually all documents would be made public. As for why President Clinton and President Kennedy’s documents are not being made available, he says that there is no real reason why they are still classified and that they should be released eventually. It is possible that he just doesn’t know why, but this is also reassuring because by that logic there isn’t any reason why they are classified. This means that the documents may have simply been caught up in red tape or are sitting in storage due to a lack of interest (Although the latter seems unlikely because the government often accepts requests for popular topics, and the Kennedy administration is such an intensely researched topic in American history).
Regarding the 1953 coup in Iran and the subsequent overthrow of the democratically-elected Prime Minister of Iran Mohammad Mossadegh, Rove seemed unsure as to whether or not the United States did the right thing. In response to Group A’s question on how far is “too far” regarding foreign relations, Rove replied that the assassination of a head of state would be going too far. Since Mossadegh was simply deposed instead of killed, this would not be an example of “going too far.” However, according to a January 2007 Washington post article the Bush administration authorized U.S. troops in Iraq to kill or capture Iranian operatives as part of an “aggressive new strategy to weaken Tehran’s influence across the Middle East and compel it to give up its nuclear program.”
Rove also believed that Mossadegh was a “bad actor” and was responsible for limiting Iranian freedom. He went on to say that Iranians actually had more freedom after he was overthrown. This response is at odds with those who believe that Iran was free and democratic until the United States removed the democratic leader Mossadegh. Most notable is Stephen Kinzer, who says that Iran has been progressing towards a democracy for the last 100 years. Rove didn’t seem to comment on the relationship between declassification and public opinion of Iran. An underlying point of our question was that perhaps Iran would have been viewed more sympathetically in the public’s eyes if information about Iranian democracy and the coup had been made public decades earlier.
108. March 27th, 2008 Anon wrote:
I was in Group A and I wanted to comment on Mr. Rove’s answer to the question involving the 1953 coup. I thought that he skillfully answered this difficult question. He focused primarily on Mossadeq’s negative influence on the country. By doing this, he made it appear as if Mossadeq was “bad” and overthrowing him was “good” when, in reality, these are simply his opinions.