Well, things have taken a further turn in Iran today, with Supreme Leader Khamenei's full public endorsement of Ahmadinejad's victory at the Friday prayer at Tehran University. I suspect that the people around Khamenei and Ahmadinejad concluded that the demonstrations were likely to continue, unabated, through the ten day period of the electoral review by the Guardian Council, and that this would have tremendously weakened the current power structure. They have taken a calculated risk, that the implied threats of crackdown will deter further peaceful demos. I do not see this as a "revolutionary" situation, but, rather, a conflict between two contending factions within the revolutionary class: The hardliners, grouped around Ahmadinejad and Khame nei, with their paramilitary apparatus (Revolutionary Guard, Basij, Martyrs Brigade and a group of radical clerics, typified by Yazdi), versus the more moderate elements. I would not call them "reformers" perse. They have a desire to end Iran's isolation, and see an opportunity now that may not be quite so available a year from now.
Tienenmen Square started out in a similar fashion, although cross-cultural analogies are always somewhat dangerous. A reform faction of the Chinese Communist elites tried to use the students as a leverage against a hardline faction. As time wore on, and the demonstrations/sitins continued, outside forces inevitably started mucking around, and the character of the situation changed at that point–weakening the negotiating position of the reformists who had initially encouraged the student demonstrators. They could not countenance an outside effort to stir a destabilization of the whole system, so they wound up having to go along with the crackdown–and take the political hit.
I am a strong opponent of the doctrine of humanitarian interventionism, particularly as promoted by some in the Obama administration, like Susan Rice and Samantha Powers. It is a slippery slope of its own, reducing the power of national sovereignty, especially when used in excess.
Iran is a country of strong political institutions, and elections have traditionally been the only true venue for the population to have a voice. Hence, Khatami's wins, despite the push-back by the parallel structure of IRGC and Basij, which eventually eroded Khatami's power and his credentials with his own supporters.
There is strong doubt, among some of the more informed Iranians, allied with the Mousavi camp, that the IRGC/Basij can really launch an allout crackdown. They believe that there will be a strong sense that turning guns on your own people is going too far. I cannot judge whether they are right or not. But a new phase has begun today, with the Supreme Leader clearly deciding that he has to take a strong stand–contradicting what he himself said just a few days ago. The die has been cast, the next act has begun, and the outcome has yet to be written.
We have a pretty good intelligence picture on the ground–not from twitter and facebook, but from some serious Iran experts, who have moment to moment communication with different factions in the leadership, who are directly engaged in the power struggle behind the scenes. We will have a role to play, but I don't think the Hungary parallel yet holds. This is not yet about a revolutionary overthrow of the system. Harper
———————————————————————
Actually, that is Kellie Harper. She is the women's BB ball coach at NC State. She did not write this article. pl
Well, that’s an interesting article. But I do have a few questions to ask of it (or of the author, even if it isn’t Kellie Harper)…
First, I’m not sure we here looking in on the mess know what the questions or even the motivations are that are driving this. I expect that it isn’t simple – the (probably small) leadership group is clearly going around in circles, trying to figure out how to organize a rather messy reality, but at the same time I think that the people actually going to the demonstrations are going their own way in directions that may not support ANY of the leadership factions – I’m beginning to see stories about kids form the demonstrations going “Basiji Hunting” which if true (and I would expect actually pretty successful) is going to be a huge confounding factor on the ground going forward. Trying to find a constructive way to be a “humanitarian interventionalist” in such a situation is IMO a beautifully seductive invitation to a hell ten times worse than Iraq ever was. There are SO many ways that anything you could imagine doing would make matters worse, that the only rational approach is to pretty much do nothing – certainly nothing overt.
Second, although you clearly have a large fraction of the population of many Iranian cities (NOT just Tehran) motivated enough to go out and march, I think that many in the West are making a dangerous assumption and equivalency…namely, that if these people don’t like Ahmedinejad and Khamenei, they therefore are deeply committed to turning Iran into a secular democracy along the lines of the United States. That’s ridiculously stupid, and an invitation to disaster. Granted, the people in the street may want (a lot) to see the current set of politicians go away, but that doesn’t speak at all to what they would want to replace them. Are these “humanitarian interventionalists” prepared to do whatever they do, and accept a result that is (i) STILL a deeply religious rather than secular state; (ii) STILL the default regional superpower in the Persian Gulf, and committed to exercising it’s legitimate hegemony; (iii) STILL committed to a program of nuclear development, probably currently limited to electric power applications but with obvious military follow-on competencies; (iv) STILL deeply hostile to Israel on the basis of it’s intransigence relative to the Palestinians; and (v) STILL prepared to see Iraq as part of their legitimate sphere of interest, and prepared to interfere there to achieve their ends?
Because that’s my offhand guess as to what would result from a true, popular uprising in Iran right now. It would result in a country that is much more open socially (and probably religiously) but which would nevertheless still be quite Islamic in character, and which would have (legitimate) national interests that are not particularly congruent with those of the United States in all cases, and which would be prepared to pursue them aggressively.
Anyone who thinks that some beautiful “humanitarian intervention” is somehow going to bring sweetness and light to the Persian Gulf and the rest of the Middle East is in my opinion either smoking something I’d like to share, or in desperate need of a psychiatric evaluation. Sorry, that’s just how I see it.
This analysis is a refreshing departure from the propaganda of the newly minted bleeding hearts, who never gave a whit about the Iranian people before, but are suddenly filling the airwaves with pictures of aggrieved Iranians as evidence of their deep, abiding concern for their Iranian people.
Not that I don’t think that Iranians have a lot of grievances. But I think Harper is right: it’s a struggle between elites, neither of whom care greatly about the people. Whatever comes of it, ordinary Iranians’ lot will not be greatly improved, except for a few token bones that the Rafsanjani/Mousavi camp them throw in their deep gratitude for returning the oil ministry to them.
This was interesting Col.h/t Steve Clemons
The analogy with Tienanmen might be better than not: the recently published memoires of Zhao Ziyang shows that, at some point, the reformist politicians in China lost control of the student demonstrators–so that the latter were making much more radical (and unacceptable) demands (as well as a bunch of non-political demands, like better living conditions in university dorms). People like Zhao knew that, at that point, the game was up and crackdown was inevitable, but could do nothing to stop it.
Mousavi seems to be in the same situation as Zhao et al in China: he has been adopted as the face of the dissidents, but he is not really one of them–he is a regime insider, after all. He can’t really tell the protesters to step down just because he’d been able to cut a deal with the other regime actors. But once the government decides to crack down, his career is over and there is no deal to cut any more.
Harper:
I think the distinction you make between “hardliner” versus “more moderate” is devoid of analytical content – it does not further understanding.
In US parlance, a moderate in the Middle East is someone or some political group or country that does not materially oppose the US policies [perhaps I should say fanatasies?] there.
I think this will blow over.
We have a pretty good intelligence picture on the ground–not from twitter and facebook, but from some serious Iran experts, who have moment to moment communication with different factions in the leadership, who are directly engaged in the power struggle behind the scenes.”
Unfortunately this is so classic, even the Burmese junta knows how to counter it without blinking.
I think the Iranian by now already start hunting “core” operator that cause the riot. They already get all key khatami faction. Erin Abadi is in geneva, let’s see if she can return (I doubt it. That should be an indication that her social support has completely collapsed) Next would be all infiltration operation.
How to gouge the efficiency: the minute the France 24/satellite phone reporter goes offline, that’s how efficient Iranian secret service is. (I think she is a france Iranian, she is running around protected by mousavi faction. She should be the best, most well supported operator, more so than any external inteligence/experts/terrorists/operators in from Iraq & afghanistan. I think they can scan odd radio signal and know third operators are inside Iran.
So, it’s now back to very basic. Bloody arm coup or not. Usually what “crack the nation” is when children of military family gets detained by the paramilitary (aside from active mutiny). Then things get dicey. They really need to tell their military people to keep their children in on “crack down” day. (which is another effective way to spread hush-hush, to stop going out.) But overall, the gentler the better. Soft crackdown is much more prefered than Pinochet style mass killing/detention.
It’s all a matter of how discipline their military are. They have to keep their police and military morale high and use them judiciously. On the public side, they have to be seen only as face of authority, restoring order and only react.
While on counter intelligence side, they have to move very swift. Controlling communication channel, detaining key people, and chasing infiltration operation. They have to lock up border, scan airport list, scan radio, find weapons, and safe houses. etc. It’s neighboorhood to neighboorhood operation in northern Tehran.
Once musavi leadership is decapitated and their communication line is coopted, then stopping the middle crew/neighboorhood team shouldn’t be hard. Can be done gently. They don’t want to antagonize the public even more, crowd control is the point. The effectiveness is proportional to how much people hate the bassij militia and how much civil authority central government still have. Probably will take about a month to set up and do the job. (How big is northern Tehran?)
On mousavi side, their challenge would be to keep the crowd going out. Time is not on their side, as more people being detained, the complete shape of communication channel and leadership are known.
As long as the internal of Iranian government is whole, there are some shred of respect left in people toward government authority, And the military doesn’t crack, order and legitimacy can be restored.
ffs. This is a dime a dozen “coup attempt” now. I wonder where rafsanjani is.
I’d run through a wall if Kelli Harper were cheering me on.
Just think about it. The first thing the rulers of Persia would do to Kellie Harper is stick her in a burka,a veil, and maybe slap her around a little bit(or a lot). Then they would go back to contemplating how many Jews they can incinerate with their nuke.
Personally, I think they would be a lot better off if they just spent their time contemplating coach Harper as she is. And then they could just forget all that Jew and nuke silliness.
Highlander:
There are at least 25,000 Jewish Iranians living in Iran today.
And they are not molested.
And there has been a contiuous Jewish presence in Iran longer than in Palestine.
The world is not the way you think it is.
Highlander,
It’s Israel who has the ‘nukes’, with the ‘low number’ being 150 thereabouts and the ‘high number’ being over 400. And you talk about Iran’s non-existent nukes? The Persians don’t use Burkas, that’s the Afghan Taliban (who are enemies of Iran). The only ones claiming that Iran wants to incinerate anything, are the Israeli intel propaganda store fronts like MEMRI, who want American boys and girls to die for Israel’s security.
Kelly Harper is a cute lady.
I must be missing something here. The Shah was tossed because he wasn’t “ruthless” enough according to some. This leadership must have some sense of where street protests can lead? Internal security in Iran looks quite capable of suppression of dissent. So will that happen? No one seems to know even those impacted in IRAN by the protests-for and against. What we do know is the demographics–Majority of Iranians born after 1979 revolution. Corrutpion and consilidation of the entirety of the Iranian economy by Mullah’s and Iranian Revolutionary Guard and others. Were expectations rising in IRAN? As in the A.J.P. Taylor (Birt) analysis that revolutions occur during periods of “rising expectations” not declining expectations. IRAN is flooded with internet activity so far unrestricted and WEB 2.0 seems leading the charge now. Has information led to “rising expectations?” The length and breadth of the protests look to me much more significant that public analyists or MSM in WEST have concluded. I certainly think so but not sure why or where that leaves US. Are the only options in IRAN now bloodshed and repression or something else? My guess is something else based on my view that IRANIAN politics and culture much more advanced and sophisticated than most in the WEST are willing to admit. Hey their culture is almost 4000 years old and cultures come and go. In IRAN the rotation between the secular and the religious has gone on for centuries. By the way, I know this question is somewhat simplistic–but was not ISLAM imposed on IRAN and not willing adopted without force? In fact was not ISLAM usually spread by force until the 20th Century?
There are some photos here of Kellie Harper playing flag football:
http://thereporter.wcu.edu/2009/03/from-the-bench-with-kellie-harper-womens-basketball-head-coach/
I’d say she looks kind of determined.
Instead of reasoning by inappropriate analogy, it seems to me that we should make an effort to understand Iranian history and culture as context for 1) analysis of the situation and 2)the policy discussion.
The present situation does not seem to indicate a desire of the Iranian people to restore the Pahlavis, the Qajars, or the Safavids. A republican form, including an Islamic republican form, of government seems to be the consensus of the people at this stage of their history.
How things sort out depends on not only the various elites and factions of the elites but also on the Iranian people themselves.
I strongly agree with President Obama that a serious engagement with Iran, its government and its people, is in the US national interest. Whether this is possible will depend on BOTH sides making a serious effort.
Irrespective of how things sort out internally in Iran, there is a government structure that our government structure will be dealing with…government to government, state to state.
At present the Supreme Leader in Iran is Mr. Khameni and thus he is the government official whom President Obama will be dealing with at the end of the day. Should Ayatollah Montazeri or another prominent figure replace the current Supreme Leader then that person would be who the US would deal with.
As President Obama has indicated, given the present state system in Iran, the presidential choice in Iran is not decisive in present day Iranian foreign policy. The foreign policy process would appear to be much more complex.
This is about state interests, not beauty contests, on both sides. To me it is logical that Iran needs to engage the world to attract the foreign direct investment, the technology, the know how etc. essential to further modernize the country. Given the present economic situation in Iran, it would seem to me that this would necessarily be on the agenda of the Supreme Leader and president of the country. A strong economy means a stronger Iran with an even greater regional role than it has at present…an objective all sides in Iran would seem to approve.
Is it any wonder that Iranian leaders and publics are sensitive about foreign interference given the history since WWII? Is it any wonder that Iranian leaders and publics are sensitive about the nuclear issue given the Israeli nukes aimed at them?
Is it any wonder that some Iranian leaders and publics are suspicious of foreign, particularly “Western” motives? Perhaps an SST reader specialized in Iranian affairs could explain to us just how the “West” denied Iran access to a modernized steel industry some decades ago forcing it to turn “Eastward”? Is it any wonder that Iran is presently quite comfortable with its relationship to the SCO?
I certainly think so but not sure why or where that leaves US. Are the only options in IRAN now bloodshed and repression or something else?
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 20 June 2009 at 06:58 AM
Well, the Iranian can get cynical and twisted. My most twisted scenario, and I don’t think they have the heart to pull this one.
They know that:
1. The world does not trust US and friends (not after zarkozy, Brown all yelling …freedom, vote, etc) Everybody in the planet with colonization history suddenly have that sick churn in the stomach and thinking, these mofos are doing their thing again. (trust me on this.)
2. so, this is what Iran going to do. fabricate story, North Korean style.
kidnap few troops, US/UK in afghanistan/Iraq.
Then dress him up, take pictures/video, create narrative of infiltration/inciting riot. (blurry surveillance camera showing somebody injecting himself into Iran in a box. Real action hero stuff)
A well made story like that with perfect detail will destroy everything like media nuclear weapon. Everybody in the world will believe the Iranian. The louder we and UK government protest, the more believable the story is.
The Iranian will keep “finding” this fabricated story randomly over few months… Feed it into national TV.
With that: All hell breaks loose.
To kill the opposition faction, the Iranian will go “salvadorian style”, angry mob of conservatives and believers killing every single khatami faction (funny looking hair? too fashionable? make up? dead.) What the calvin Klein wearing protestors don’t realizes, the one who will kill them are not the basij, but their fellow citizens. Out of nowhere. (This is classic CIA method against ‘red’ in 50’s and 60’s. )
Afterward every single on of opposition leaders then be captured and tried for treason.
That one is highly cynical, but very easy to do and incredibly effective.
—-
US enters fully. bombing, infiltration, cruise missile, light infantry enter… yet another “operation enduring freedom” The usual dubious stuff.
-do the right thing. Chill down crowd control, mend rift, and go back to economic growth. (I believe this is the only way to do, very hard, but ultimately the best for everybody and least bloody)
– Arm coup by Iran faction backed by western weapons and intel. (We will know in about a month at the latest.)
Babak,
Take a look at:
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_4823.shtml
What’s your assessment regarding the article?
I wonder how much of a role the power struggle between the ‘moderates’ vs. the ‘hardliners’ played in the last street protests, compared to the role played by outside elements and forces? how much evidence do we have of its predominance in influencing last week events?
I just read a translation of Khamenei’s speech last Friday, and i wonder if it’s not just simply what he said it was?:
“This is between the [] parties”…someone from without the country had wanted “to make people believe that they had been fooled” to trigger regime change through violent street protests.
Could it have just been a media campaign from outside the country in the months that lead to election day, to surreptitiously make enough people believe that Mousavi’s win was inevitable? Then feeling cheated, rightfully or not, these same people would feel compelled to demonstrate, counting on ‘moderates’ to jump on the bandwagon and their ‘outrage’ would have the revolutionary snow ball effect that often demonstrations have?
Khamenei’s message was clear though and i’m not convinced the demonstrations will continue unabated for ten days:
The election campaign was open and transparent. The turnout was excellent. Some “outside forces” had wanted to cast doubt about the outcome in order to force regime change from the streets instead of the ballot box. But the rule of law will prevail. The people voted. Any other recourse beside legal action is not only anti-democratic but unconstitutional. If you take to the streets, it is at your own risk.
I wonder were I an Iranian in Tehran today, if i wouldn’t be compelled to refrain from taking to the streets?
William R.Cumming:
the answer to your question is just a few clicks away. Iran is as much a muslim country as Lebanon is an arab one. At least for the present time. Playing on some divisive centuries old Persian/Zoroastrianism resentment is just prove of a hidden agenda.
“IRAN is flooded with internet activity so far unrestricted and WEB 2.0 seems leading the charge now.”
“The length and breadth of the protests look to me much more significant that public analyists or MSM in WEST have concluded.”
In a country that lies at the bottom of the list of countries with the highest computer ownership rate, where 23% are illiterate and where the central government can block FaceBook by the click of a button! Watch out people! Millions of young beautifull westernized Iranians are taking to the streets ready for regime change.
Khamenei : someone did want “to make people believe that they had been fooled”.
If what happens in Iran is any business of ours whatsoever, it has to do with the threats and actions of our ally Israel.
After, with Israel out of the picture, Iran = China. And you will recall the strong stance taken by the US on internal matters in China.
But when you include the 51st State, Israel, what happens in Iran directly concerns the US, and I believe it is this that Colonel Lang was implying in his recent post equating Iran with Hungary.
For that reason, a crypto-pacifist like myself believes that the US should do everything short of putting uniformed troops on the ground in Iran to overturn the hard-liners.
Interestingly, on the international scene, such an action would be met with a tremendous ho-hum.
The real question is what the Iranian reaction would be. Did the US’s belligerence under Bush-Baby put the hard-liners in power.
An enigma wrapped in a conundrum.
William R. Cumming:
You asked” ” was not ISLAM imposed on IRAN and not willing adopted without force”.
The answer is no – people converted gradually and over time. Estimates vary but one that I recall was 11-th Century – the date by which the conversion to Islam was more or less complete in the Iranian Pleateau.
j:
I do not find the scenario of Mousavi-Montazeri rulership plausible.
I do not think Mr. Khamenei would have ever sacrificed Mr. Ahmadinejad. Nor do I think his position is weak or weakened.
I also think that Mr. Montazeri is not relevant, it is Mr. Rafsanjani who is. I wonder where he is – he was not present yesterday in the Friday Prayers at Tehran University; he is the Head of Expediency Council as well as the Speaker of the Assembly of Experts. His counterparts, the Speaker of Majlis and the Head of Judiciary as well as the President were present.
But events are moving in a different direction. Mr. Khamenei, in his sermon, has both praised Mr. Rafsanjani and implicitly threatened him with exposure. I expect Mr. Rafsanjani to show up in an official photograph together with other Iranian leaders soon.
I do not have enough information regarding the manipulation of the Iranian supporters of Mr. Mousavi by foreigners. Certainly there seems to have been a flat rejection of the elections as fraudulent without supplying any evidence [to this day I have not seen any]. In fact, the more I have read the Internet, the more I have become convinced of the results of the Iranian presidential elections. For example, Mossad chief Meir Dagan on Tuesday told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that “Election fraud in Iran is no different than what happens in liberal states during elections.”
I do not think that some of the men behind this internal power struggle care about Iran’s foreign relations at the moment; they care about their own position and power. This type of thinking showed itself several times under the Presidency of Mr. Khatami whereby foreign visitors to Iran were harassed by the “pressure-elements” in order to sabotage his détente policies with US and EU states. As I have observed before, US leaders, however misguided one would consider them at times, love the United States. One clearly cannot say the same thing about some Iranian leaders.
In regards to foreign relations; the plot is too thick. In my opinion, Russia, China, and even India have a very very very serious stake at the preservation of an independent (but pricky) Iran. A US-EU allied Iran is not in the cards.
An Expatriate USA citizen, in Spain, has an interesting statistical analysis of the Tweet messages from IRAN. This analysis seems to suggest outside direction of the student “revolt”. There is no mention in MSM on the 400 millon $ attempt to undermine Iran’s goverment [as per previous news, and analysis in the New Yorker], nor indication from the USA administration that this effort should cease as a REALISTIC SIGN THAT MR OBAMA’S CAIRO SPEECH WAS NOT EMPTY BS.
\
The cited blog is always interesting
Sorry left out the url:
http://seaton-newslinks.blogspot.com/
It is not easy to get a sense of the situation in recent days, particularly through the distortions of Western (“pro-Israel”) corporate media. Here is a sample of images and video by locals getting online from on the ground over there:
http://iranelection.posterous.com/
The demographic factor should be minimized. Like Britain & France, post WWI, Iran lost a generation due to the Iran – Iraq war. Those lost were youngsters during the Revolution and theoretically most bound and indoctrinated in its worthiness and continuation. The generation(s) since then do not have such an emotional investment; the majority, I think it safe to say, are interested in outcomes.
While I agree that this started in large part as a dispute between ruling elites, it moving past that. A betting man would wager that this turmoil will be brutally and successfully put down, but regardless the trendline Iran was following has been skewed.
I believe many draw the wrong lesson from events like Tiananmen. While it failed, China did change, it had to change, not as fast or as far as hopes would wish – but it is better than it was (and paradoxically more of a challenger to the US than it could ever had been if such had not occurred).
We have a tendency to discount the revolution in communications in the past 30-40 years. One can make a pretty powerful argument that one of the prime movers of the fall of the Soviet Union was not anything the US did, but the ubiquity of the fax machine. The Internet hardly existed 10 years ago. The greatest threat to any authoritarian regime is information.
Suspicion about how many tweets are really Iranians in Iran on twitter:
http://openanthropology.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/americas-iranian-twitter-revolution/
I’m afraid that Americans who won’t waste two breaths to ask for investigation (let alone prosecution) of the previous Administration are perfectly happy to have Iranians shed their blood in the name of liberty.
When the Israelis went into Gaza in order to silence the Hamas rocket launchers. This blog was alive,virtually seething with righteous indignation over the supposedly cruel Israeli actions against those nice sweet innocent Hamas boys in Gaza. Who after all had only fired around a thousand rockets or so into Israel.
Now with the Persian Mullahs slaughtering their own people in the streets. All I hear is academic discussions of the dynamics of Iranian politics and revolutionary movements in general. No cries of justice for the mounting pile of dead muslims killed by their muslim masters( disporportionately females, I belive from the evidence.)
Even some dark hints that the CIA with the help of those clever JEWs are behind it all.(You don’t suppose Bush and Cheney are still in control do you?)
I’m to far away to smell the stench of innocent Iranian blood being shed.
What I do smell is the stench of hypocrisy from some of you posting here.
Highlander:
Seems that in Gaza approx 1400 deaths and major infrastructure damage was achieved in 20 days.
Iran has between 15-30 deaths, the first being an attempt at arson on an occupied building.
Up to now these does not seem to be any major infrastructure damage, very few deaths, no endless people living in tents, and no hard data that A lost the election.
Thus, there is no need for major indignation on the Iran issue.
Highlander:
Indeed.
And what did you yourself do precisely in regards to the events at Ruby Ridge and Waco?
‘Why’ is Highlander always ‘making excuses’ for the Israeli government? Hmmmm…… There is more to life than just Israel.
The Mideast is replete with life, and then you have the party poopers Israeli government always mucking it up for the entire neighborhood. And if anybody dares to call them on the carpet for their bloodthirsty behavior, the Israeli government through their Hasbra go into overdrive labeling those who dare to criticize either anti-Semite or a self-hater.
The topic is Iran, not Israeli excuse making, or have I missed something?
Salamon & Makkinejad
You can’t have it both ways boys.
If you want to play the morally superior card against Israel. Then you can’t turn a blind eye toward the crimes of your own despotic muslim leaders, and pretend it’s all just a little misunderstanding in the muslim family.
You may not realise it, but when you do. You look intellectually corrupt, and to be either a fool and or a hypocrite.
To say the least it undermines your case with any thinking person.
Babak,
Here’s another interesting article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1552784/Bush-sanctions-black-ops-against-Iran.html
I am not entirely sure I understand why we are, at this point, witnessing crimes by “my own despotic muslim leaders.” From all indications, we are witnessing an extremely sore loser in an important election, and a bunch of non-Iranians who are delighted at the opportunity to create chaos. Hence, the desire to not allow the results of the election to be challenged through legal means. Even if Ahmadenajad stole the election, the correct punishment is many years in prison, perhaps even a lifetime. It is not being ripped into shreds by a lynch mob.
The problem with you people is that you are never satisfied. There is no form of government that will ever be acceptable to you in Iran, other than absolute, complete anarchy and in-fighting. That is because you cannot countenance the idea of any people living in prosperity if they are not subordinate to your mode of thinking. You want the entire world to be Gaza. Every leader that is not subordinate to you is a despot.
Higlander:
I ask again: What did you do personally in regards to Ruby Ridge or Waco?
What is your opinion – personal view – in regards to Mr. Clinton and his AG? Is the US Government a criminal enterprise? Do we need regime change in US? Please clarify so that we all know where we stand – as I have been standing here exposed for the past few years.
In regards to Israel – I personally have had a principled position – Israelis have to leave Occupied Lands. The Palestinians are not citizens of the State of Israel, they have no representation in that government. They are resisting the depredations of the that occupation government.
In regards to the events of the past week in Iran: one group of voters did not accept the results of an election in which their candidate lost. They alleged vote rigging without providing a shred of evidence and then went on and rioted largely in Tehran: burning buses, cars, etc. The government suppressed them.
I fail to see why I have to take a moral stand here: when the French Police suppressed the rioters in Paris in November of 2007 I believed that the French Government had to restore order. I had no problem with that. I fail to see in the way in which that last week’s events in Iran are different.
And precisely what crimes are we talking about: could you please enumerate them?
J:
Thank you for the URL which I read.
Nevertheless, I think that there are clearly 13 Million voters in Iran that are deeply and genuinely dissatisfied with the way they are governed. That countries are divided is not uncommon – what is uncommon in Iran is the conceptual distance between these 2 groups of voters.
Since the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the voice of no single Iranian female singer has been permitted to be heard on the air on in theaters – you see – it is against Islam. It is frustrating and sad to see people gather under the ancient bridges of Isphahan and sing the old lyrical Persian songs since they cannot hear anything new. And Isphahan is a conservative town compared to Northern Tehran.
I think the Iranian leaders will have to find a way to address the wishes and desires of these voters who clearly are among some of the best educated and worldly Iranians. I think even without the riots this would have been an issue and the riots indicated, in my opinion, the depths of frustration among certain sectors of the Iranian society.
I think there are many many steps that Iranian government could take to address these concerns: they could change the electoral laws so that “external conformance to Islam” could no longer be used as a criterion to disqualify candidates, dissolve the “religious police”, un-muzzle the press, and adhere to the Law.
The Iranian leaders have to find a way that will “neither burn the skewer nor the kabob” as the Persian saying goes.
Byron Raum:
Yes, I agree.
For 70 years, Mexico was a one-party state with a restricted form of representative government. And nary a peep out of US & EU about that. Even when the President of Mexico massacred student protestors without warning in Mexico City in 1973.
Likewise, in South Korea, for decades we had a semi-sovereign state in which labour organizers, political activists, human right campaigners and others were routinely murdered by Korean security organizations without any protest from any one – significantly none from US – the patron of the Republic of Korea. In fact, I think it was the fear of a repeat of the Iranian and Nicaraguan Revolutions that concentrated the minds of US strategic thinkers like a death sentence and caused US to revamp and clean-up South Korea.
Therefore, reluctantly, I have come to the conclusion that US and EU are against the Iranian power as an independent state that they do not control and on which they have little or no leverage. The Nuclear file, the elections, human rights etc. are only methods for exerting pressure on a state that is not bending to their will. Jefferson could be the Iranian President and US & EU would still be against her.
I wonder how much of a role played the power struggle between the ‘moderates’ vs. the ‘hardliners’ in the last street protests, compared to the role played by outside elements and forces? how much evidence do we have of its predominance in influencing last week events?
I just read a translation of Khamenei’s speech last Friday, and i wonder if it’s not just simply what he said it was?:
“This is between the [] parties”…someone from without the country had wanted “to make people believe that they had been fooled” to trigger regime change through violent street protests.
Could it have just been a media campaign from outside the country in the months that lead to election day, to surreptitiously make enough people believe that Mousavi’s win was inevitable. Then feeling cheated, rightfully or not, these same people would feel compelled to demonstrate hoping that their ‘outrage’ would have the revolutionary snow ball effect that often demonstrations have?
Khamenei’s message was clear though and i’m not convinced the demonstrations will continue unabated for ten days:
The election campaign was open and transparent. The turnout was excellent. Some “outside forces” had wanted to cast doubt about the outcome in order to force regime change from the streets instead of the ballot box. But the rule of law will prevail. The people voted. Any other recourse beside legal action is not only anti-democratic but unconstitutional.
I wonder were I an Iranian in Tehran today, if i wouldn’t be compelled to refrain from taking to the streets?
Mark Stuart,
Reports out of Iran show officials pointing a finger at the terrorist organization MEK which although based outside the country has operatives inside the country.
MEK operates out of London and other venues. MEK is of course a favorite of the Neocons and crazies both Dem and Republican.
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2009/06/22/mek/index.html
I understand that the power struggle inside Iran’s governing class is moving into a new phase, in which behind closed doors, negotiations are going on, over some kind of modification of power sharing. Don’t know the likely outcome, beyond growing likelihood, now that the Guardian Council has spoken, that Ahmadinejad will remain as President. Beyond that, Al Arabiya is claiming that some Grand Ayatollahs in Qom are contemplating a move to oust Khamenei as Supreme Leader (Expediency Council has authority to do that), a move to remove Ahmadinejad as President, and new restructuring of the government. I doubt this is true, or likely, and it could be Saudi disinformation. But clearly, the street events, whether they continue on or halt, have altered the situation. Some European powers, including the British, would like to use the events to prevent any forward movement on a US-Iranian rapproachmont, because it would make manipulation of the region more difficult.
The demonstrations have so far remained an internal affair, although the Iranian government is trying to link the demonstrators to clear outside provocations by MEK (big infusions of Saudi money to MEK have been recently noted).