John O’Sullivan has a lengthy report of accounts in Iran, from sources inside the country (at The Corner).
In brief, it’s one of the most important movements of our time. It radically undermines both the realist argument that Muslims are uninterested in democracy and the Jihadist claim to represent the mass of Muslims. And if it continues—whether it is crushed or triumphs in the immediate future—it will add immeasurably to the forces of evolutionary change in the Muslim world since it strikes me as being more like the Glorious, American and “velvet” revolutions (i.e., it is a revolution against a radical revolution) than like the French, Bolshevik, and 1979 revolutions.
Well, that’s a bigger mouthful than you expected. But this is an issue on which I would prefer you to take the advice and opinions of my Iranian colleagues on Radio Farda and the English language website of RFERL. So I am attaching two documents below that I think you will find helpful.
As of right now, we don’t know how this will go. It is purest optimism to think that Iran will evolve into a democracy as we know it and that Mousavi will be the key to it. However, some have speculated (and stated in this thread) that Mousavi is no better than anyone else. Indeed, even if he had won (which he might have) there’s no telling if his reforms would pass. What we do know is that the current genration of Iranians are fed up and are demanding a change. This could eventually translate into a more politcally and socially pliable Iran.
One can hope.
RW- no-one is currently proposing the overthrow of the current system.
What is happening now is only the articulation of the serious problems of the current system. The people will realize that to deal with this, requires not just a ‘new leader’ but a new system.
That comes next. First, the people, who are the under 30s, must strengthen themselves and their contacts with the external world. That is why I’m saying that people on the electronic network must be in constant contact with them. And world leaders should talk about democracy. Just support democracy; that’s all.
That network of contacts and the notion that democracy is at the root of these contacts, will move the Iranian people to want a change in the system. Not a change of leadership.
Kinyobe – Iran will become a democracy but I doubt if Mousavi will be its leader. In a way, it’s better that he DIDN’T ‘win’ because if he had, he’d have governed in a somewhat similar way and the reform would be submerged and unclear.
Now that he has been marginalized by the leadership, it is clear that the authoritarian regime wants to retain power. And the people want power. This has become clear..to the people above all. It has moved outside of ideas and the coffee shops and into open expression. And the regime’s refusal to give up power has been openly expressed as well.
So, in a way, this clarity of both sides, has been the beneficial result of Mousavi ‘losing’. Now, comes the next stages… I really don’t think that the regime can control the under 30 crowd that well.
ET, how will this change evolve?
How will the tyrants be deposed and who will take over?
It’s one thing to get rid of dictators, it’s quite another to have a vacuum.
I’m sure you’ve heard but a young woman was shot (one among many). This will get very bloody before the end is in sight.
Osumashi Kinyobe – I think that’s the central point, the “vacuum”. Forget Mousavi. This will surely depend on whether some sort of leadership emerges; and, I would guess, if it comes down to it, on how loyal the security forces are to the regime. America has elected a President who will be useless to these young Iranians, but then again, this isn’t the “Prague Spring”; there are plenty of evil Middle Eastern governments but no Bloc to crush this from without.
Or it might come to nothing. If only this had happened, say, a year and a half ago.
the reporters don’t get it.
the protesters don’t get it.
sda followers don’t get it and all the sympathetic but unlearned masses don’t get it.
the election was going to leave amajamajimjam in power regardless of the ballot count.
now do you get it?
the mullahs and jihadists and tehran police and bin laden and the whole despicable gang were in on the secret. the ‘election’ was a device to shut up and shut out any inching towards the dangerous reform.
it may backfire. remember, the bolsheviks tried and failed in 1905 and then tried and ‘succeeded’ in 1917.
the american revolutionary war went way past 1776; it could have gone either way.
time to put your computer in standby mode or whatever the Apple folks call it and read some history books.
then you too can be in on the secret *beforehand*
Thanks a bunch, Black Mamba.
That clarifies some things.
“the election was going to leave amajamajimjam in power regardless of the ballot count.”
REALLY?!? D’you think that might be why those Iranians are acting up? I mean… I’d just never thought of it like that… Thanks global view!
I think that the crackdown will be brutal – but just like Tiananmen, the toothpaste is out of the tube, and it ain’t going back.
My understanding is that Iranians were a pretty secular bunch for the most part – and pre-2000 had some not so bad feelings for the US
This is truly encouraging news, but I hate to say that many Iranians will be injured, likely tortured, and killed over the next little while
Obama will fence sit, and lose an opportunity to really show greatness
Re: “people find out that Obama isn’t legally, Constitutionally President ’cause he wasn’t born in the US to two US citizens?”
The meaning of Natural Born Citizen in the Constitution is born in the USA, which Obama was. It does not require two US parents. “Natural Born Citizen” is the US equivalent of Natural Born Subject in British common law and the citizenship laws of the colonies and States before and during the Revolution, which means born in the territory, simply born in the territory.
And that is why such prominent conservative Senators who are also lawyers as Orren Hatch and Lindsay Graham say that a Natural Born Citizen is simply one who was born in the USA:
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), said:
“Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.” (December 11, 2008 letter to constituent)
Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT), said:
“What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.” (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)
The Guardian has a phone video of the young lady shot in Iran bleeding out before our eyes…
Very disturbing.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/22/neda-iran-protest
What amazes meis these Iranians are doing this knowing they won’t get any help from anyone.
Obama is a weak reed.
I pray they can get rid of this Nut & his Masters.
JMO
Osumashi Kinyobe – having visited your excellent website several times, and read your comments here, I’m aware that you are more qualified than I am to speculate about this stuff. I’m really just free-associating. But thanks for being gracious.
global view – bin laden? Get cereal. Al despises Shites almost as much as Jews.
Maybe you should put your computer on standby. But it’s nice to pontificate.
“the election was going to leave amajamajimjam in power regardless of the ballot count.”
REALLY?!? D’you think that might be why those Iranians are acting up? I mean… I’d just never thought of it like that… Thanks global view!
Posted by: Black Mamba at June 21, 2009 11:41 PM ”
yes mamba, really. the ‘election’ results were determined 2 years ago when hints of necessitating one to appease the masses popped up.
its the *predetermination* aspect of long long ago I raise, and likewise the world’s response to the protests. it was all in the fix long ago. spontaneity anywhere in the mix shows the ridiculous expectations of the Iranian and non Iranian protestors and sympathizers in and outside Iran.
now do you get it?
here it is put another way: the protests cause a reaction of surprise a.k.a. whodathunkit: 100s of thousands in the streets of Tehran. they were however the result of a predetermined outcome. Im sure there are interpretations in a courtroom to this kind of thing on a smaller scale, and is related to the ‘law of unintended consequences; the circumstance triggering those consequences were entirely predictable years ago.
resolving crises like this requires one to be far more skilled at knowing what is coming. like me.
but who’s listening eh?
ET; I agree with much of what you have to say. It was not that long ago that people expressed doubt that Iraqis could or would embrace democracy. I would have thought that all of the purple fingers we saw would have convinced the doubters otherwise, but apparently not.
global view
Your arguments amount to pronouncing on the obvious in a convoluted pretentious manner compounded with ridiculous errors and tenuous historical analogies – time to put down the pipe. But it must flatter your ego to have the *inside track*
resolving crises like this requires one to be far more skilled at knowing what is coming. like me.
Posted by: global view at June 22, 2009 12:34 AM
It’s a good thing you don’t list humility as a requirement.
Iran has been principle provider of support for the insurgents in Iraq for years. This is no secret to anyone, least of all the potus. Hundreds if not thousands of American and coalition soldiers have been killed by this effort and thousands more wounded. The unrest in Iraq currently is an opportunity to put the Iranian theocracy out of the insurgency export business.
That Obama has essentially sat on his hands through this and that the vast majority of the MSM has downplayed the opportunity and what it might mean (CTV yesterday was headlining that “stability” was returning to Tehran implying that this was a good thing) means that going forward Obama to some extent now his the blood of those troops killed and maimed in Iraq and elsewhere by Iranian supported actions as do his MSM enablers.
Agent Smith is correct. AQ really has no time for Shiites, AQ is a Arab and Sunni dominated movement. There isnt a lot of love for Persians and Shiites….just saying.
As for it being predetermined, it probably was and this is why people are objecting. Nobody, least of all under 30’s, like haiving their dreams dashed. Whether they can sicceed or not is another question, whether Mousavi is a temporary leader or not is another question. Mousavi, if he wishes to ride the Tiger will have to fuflfill on some major, but not all reforms.
Some of the demonstartors, if they actually succeed, will inevitably be disappointed. The real question is how much will the Mullahs be removed from formal power? They wont lose influence for a long time, they are part of the society.
But if Iran moves to a less theocratic power structure we might actually see someone we can speak with rationally, soemthing that has been missing since 1979. And BTW, if they do move to that it will be despite, not because of anything GWB or Obama have done.
One thing springs to my mind here. The Powers That Be in Iran don’t have the bogey man Saddam Hussein to conjure with any more. Saddam’s a dead guy, dragged out of a spider hole by the Americans.
Couple days ago we had a post reminding us that the Iran/Iraq war killed a lot of guys, and feelings ran pretty deep out in the sticks among the Iranian veterans.
Well, George Bush put paid to Saddam, and all those Iranian Vets got to see it on TV. I bet there was some street dancing and candy handed out when Saddam went for the high jump. Odd that we didn’t see much of that on TV, eh?
So now, could be, I’m just sayin’, all those old guys my age are getting tired of watching their neighbor’s kid get hung from a hydro pole because they’re gay. And maybe they’re tire of having their daughters hassled by some old harpy from the hijab squad because their scarf isn’t on straight, or their socks are the wrong colour.
People won’t put up with that crap unless they know there’s something worse going to happen if they don’t. Saddam was worse than the mullahs, no question. The Shah was probably worse than the mullahs, I don’t know but lets say just for the sake of argument.
The Shah is gone. Saddam is gone. There’s no reason to take crap from the mullahs any more. Holding a crooked election is just not on, so people are rising up.
Good on them. I hope I never see it here.
Iran’s revolutionary fires will be fueled as well by their collapse in oil revenue, based on dwindling exports. They are plagued by the same failings as the national Mexican oil producer Pemex with inadequate investment in production and exploration. As a consequence, their production is flat to declining.
Add to that their penchant for supplying cheap fuel domestically (gasoline in Iran prices about at about 25 cents per litre) and they have rapidly rising internal consumption.
This trend is projected to eliminate exports within 5 years. There is nothing like an economic collapse to stoke a revolutionary fervor.
Ironically, they would be well served to have nuclear generation of electricity, to enhance exports of oil, but I do not trust the Mullahs to refrain from a weapons program.
According to our MSM (CNN is on this Iran crisis almost exclusively), It’s the Iranian youth who are fed up with the old system. 65% of University graduates in Iran are female but they have no rights to have any jobs of power: Judges, Government etc…Husbands must also give permission for them to be in the work force. Women cannot mingle with men in many areas. They are segregated in mosques and even on buses where they have to sit in the back.
Unemployment is very high even though the country is very oil rich.
This movement wants more freedom and prosperity with the women pushing the hardest. It is increasingly being described as a sort of women libs of the 60’s/Sufragettes of the early 20th century with the black discrimination movement of the 60’s US south all meshed together.
At this point they are not moving to overthrow the Mullahs who really have all the powers. The Presidents are just their puppets although they were hoping to send the Mullahs a message for change by removing the Mullah faithful/Conservative Admaninajad.
It is now too late to turn it around. Violence and suffering might be minimized in the short term if the protesters stop now but one by one their most participating/vocal activists will be rounded up and ‘dissapear’ in order to scare and discourage future uprizings. If they stop now, the Mullahs will also take away their communication tools. Twitter will dissapear for sure.
If they carry on, much blood will spill in the short term but the Autocracy will eventually crack. The mission is to ‘demoralize’ the army and pro Mullah guards. The people need to turn the guns towards the Mullahs by their own power structure. Let’s pray and hope they are succesful.
I don’t know. Is anyone willing to actually send them guns? It has been pretty obvious for a while now that Iran has been fighting a proxy war against the west in Iraq/Afghanistan/Sudan. Maybe it is time our side got a proxy? Unless this is being considered, or implemented (and I doubt the Great Apologizer of the United States has the inclination) by someone, somewhere, isn’t it pointless to pretend that we support freedom and liberty for all?
Going out in the streets and protesting isn’t going to accomplish a damn thing (any more than it did in Lebanon) for the opposite reason that Gandhi’s actions did work.
If you are dealing with the British in the post-war years, you are dealing with reasonable people.
In Tehran, you are not.
The likelihood of success is positively correlated with the propensity to violence of the ruling thugs. The more easily they fall back on violence, and the more violent their reaction, the less likely singing camp songs is going to get you your way.
The difference between Tehran circa 1979 and Tehran circa 2009 is that there is no armed insurrection hiding behind the moral authority of the peaceful protesters in 2009. Protest alone doesn’t work.
The only lesson here is that we don’t assume that every person in a muslim country is on board with the head hackers. Clearly, the silent majority are not representative by those in power. Also clear it that it doesn’t matter. The same could be said of Germany. Twice.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8112173.stm
“The Iranian election supervising body, the Guardian Council, has acknowledged irregularities in more than 50 constituencies in the disputed presidential election.
It said that the number of votes collected in 50 cities had surpassed the number of voters registered, but added that it did not affect the overall result of the election won by President Ahmadinejad.”
Looks like time for a ‘free and fair’ election, rather than a vote stuffing exercise. In any other democratic country vote stuffing in 50 constituencies would trigger a new election.
I would be asking the same thing if I were Iranian:
“Where is my vote?”
Cheers
Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
There’s a great article in todays WSJ.com by Fouad Ajami, entitled “Obama’s Persian Tutorial.” Brief excerpts:
“That ambivalence at the heart of the Obama diplomacy about freedom has not served American policy well in this crisis. We had tried to “cheat” — an opening to the regime with an obligatory wink to those who took to the streets appalled by their rulers’ cynicism and utter disregard for their people’s intelligence and common sense….Mr. Obama’s statement that ‘the difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi in terms of their actual policies may not be as great as had been advertised’ put on cruel display the administration’s incoherence.”
(….)
“…I was in Saudi Arabia when Mr. Obama traveled to Riyadh and Cairo. The earth did not move, life went on as usual. There were countless people puzzled by the presumption of the entire exercise, an outsider walking into sacred matters of their faith. In Saudi Arabia, and in the Arabic commentaries of other lands, there was unease that so complicated an ideological and cultural terrain could be approached with such ease and haste…” (emph mine)
Speaking of ease and haste, those blithe commenters who spout, with a Father Christmas mien en route to giving a “what me worry” verdict on the unrest, variants of “Mousavi’s just as bad as Ahmadinejad,” are grossly oversimplifying what’s going on in Iran, perhaps in order to tout the wisdom of their own shrug. Note that outside of a couple of small rallies, he protesters aren’t waving Mousavi banners (unlike the Ahmadinejad counter-rally-ers, who wave identical, mass-produced placards) and they are not chanting slogans for Mousavi. We’re seeing broader cultural unrest, tension between theocratic rulers and their supporters on one hand and younger, forward-thinking, modern and educated Persians on the other. We should stand behind the latter, and not consign their cause to the scrap-heap just because some politician or other is situating himself — nominally on the side of the protesters, almost incidental to their final concerns — in the unrest.
Plus, of course, one need not deign to provide justification for not giving a rat — it’s a pretty much self-contained, self-sponsoring attitude.
“The likelihood of success is positively correlated with the propensity to violence of the ruling thugs.”
Ooops… negatively correlated. As in inverse.
It’s Monday. That is my excuse.
Thanks, Black Mamba.
Jason: even if the protests do nothing now, they could, further on down the line, re-emerge as a stronger political force. Wishful thinking, maybe.