Iranian-Americans say history is at hand

[The Overlord]

No heated debate here, I've just been watching the situation closely. It appears one of the Arab world's largest powers is about to turn itself inside out, at long last.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/06/17/iran.elections.protests/index.html

Some Iranian-Americans, watching the post-election unrest in Iran, say the tug-of-war between the people and their hardline government has come to a head after three decades.


"I am absolutely convinced that what we are witnessing is a turning point in the history of the Islamic Republic," said Dr. Hamid Dabashi, professor of Iranian Studies and Comparative Literature at Columbia University in New York City.

"Even if the Islamic Republic survives this crisis, it will no longer be as it used to be," added Dabashi.

The contentious election results between conservative incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and reformist challenger Mir Hossein Moussavi sent many Iranians protesting in the streets, while others celebrated Ahmadinejad's apparent victory.

Kaveh Afrasiabi, who has taught at Tehran University and Boston University and identifies himself as an independent, told CNN that Ahmadinejad's widespread support in rural areas and small towns was the reason for his win. In results announced hours after the polls closed, Ahmadinejad received more than 62 percent of the vote, a figure hotly disputed by Moussavi's supporters.

With the credibility of Friday's election under scrutiny, how the Islamic Republic of Iran overcomes it and reclaims its legitimacy in the eyes of some of its own citizens and the international community remains to be seen.

"There is good reason to believe that many if not most of the pro-Moussavi demonstrators are gladly taking an opportunity to safely protest something bigger: their enormous discontent with the entire system as it stands," said Shirin Sadeghi, a Middle East analyst for the Huffington Post.


The unstable political, social and economic climate has some scholars questioning the future of the Islamic Republic.

"They are either going to crack down severely or they are going to cave in -- it could go either way," Dabashi said of the conservatives who now dominate Iran's government.

Many Iranian-Americans say they see this as their opportunity for change.

"This is the best chance Iranians have to evolve to a better situation," said Dr. Ali Nayeri, a professor at the University of California at Irvine.

That chance has sparked an unprecedented wave of spontaneous demonstrations not only within Iran but also thousands of miles away from Tehran --- scenes unparalleled since the 1979 revolution.

"Thirty years ago we had the war with Iraq. Now we have an internal war with our president and the fundamentalists," said Reza Goharzad, a political analyst who worked with Moussavi when he was prime minister of Iran.

Goharzad, of Southern California, was among thousands of voters to cast an absentee ballot.

"This was the first time I voted in 30 years," said Goharzad.

The enthusiasm that drove record numbers of Iranian-Americans to the voting booths was overshadowed by disappointment when a shortage of ballots prevented hundreds from voting. In addition, the election results were announced before many of the voting booths in the U.S. had closed.

Alex Vatanka, senior Middle East analyst at IHS Jane's, a provider of defense and security information, said Iran's supreme ruler, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, may have miscalculated the mood of the country when he endorsed Ahmadinejad's victory before the country's election authority made the final call. Khamenei has since asked the authority, the Guardian Council, to recount some of the votes. But Moussavi is asking for fresh elections.

Goharzad, like many other voters, questions the legitimacy of the election. He wants to know where his vote went.

A student activist in Dallas, Texas, echoed that sentiment.

"The election volunteer at my voting location said that they had 500 ballots, which was not enough for the thousand or so people that turned out to vote," said the activist, who wanted to remain anonymous because he plans to visit Iran soon.

For the first time, Iranian-Americans say, the post-revolution generation has seen the power of their unity unfold in masses. They say this has given Iranians at home and abroad hope that reform could be within their reach, if the ruling mullahs are willing to allow it.

"We are seeing a rise of a new generation of Iranians who are not taking it anymore," said Dabashi.

"This is no longer just about this election, this is full-fledged civil disobedience," he added.

The divide within the Islamic Republic has pitted the reformists against the conservatives.

"The big difference between these protests and the student riots of 1999 and 2001 is that we are seeing senior caliber officials like Mir Hossein Moussavi, Mehdi Karrubi and Mohammad Khatami and Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani supporting the demonstrations," said Vatanka.

Karrubi is a former Parliament speaker. Khatami and Rafsanjani are former presidents.

Some experts say where Iran is headed actually has a lot to do with its past.

"Rafsanjani made no secret of his disdain for Ahmadinejad ahead of the election, and even back in 2005 when he lost the second round runoff to Ahmadinejad," said Sadeghi.

Rafsanjani is chairman of the Assembly of Experts and oversees the 86-member body, which is responsible for appointing the supreme leader and monitoring his performance.

Behind closed doors, Iran's political parties are caught in the middle of a power struggle between Supreme Leader Khamenei and Rafsanjani.

Rafsanjani's role as chairman of the assembly gives him the ability to influence that body's attitudes toward Khamenei, Vatanka said.

That could only add more fuel to the political fire and social unrest in the streets, analysts say.

Politics aside, at the end of the day, Iranian expatriates such as Mitra Gholami, who participated in the historic 1979 protests, feel a sense of deja vu.

Gholami, now an Atlanta resident, fled Iran with her three children 15 years ago. "I want people to have a normal life," said Gholami. "I want them to have freedom."

[Vekseid]

If Elliquiy's wasn't nearly saturated I'd be happy to set up a proxy : /

[The Overlord]

 
This thing is changing by the moment. There is a dedicated ring of hackers on using their own machines at unidentified American universities who are successfully punching hole after hole in the national firewall Iran is attempting to stop the freeflow of information with.

NBC's Brian Williams described it as a minute by minute race rather than a marathon between the hackers and government, and the government is losing. These guys are dedicated to a free and open web, as it should be. Messages of protesters in the streets are appearing also in French and English because they know the world is watching this closely.


To the hackers out there pushing to crack Iran open, best of luck and kick some ass. If they can get a more tolerant leadership in there, with Obama in office here, there is extremely real possibility here of burying a 30-year hatchet between our nations.

[The Overlord]

The End Game in Iran: Four Ways the Crisis May Resolve

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090618/wl_time/08599190535600

Some observers see Iran's courageous protests against a stolen election as a replay of the 1979 revolution that ended the tyranny of the Shah - or of the "velvet revolutions" that ended communism in Eastern Europe. Others fear a repeat of China's 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. But none of these comparisons easily fits the unique combination of discord on the streets and infighting in the corridors of power currently under way in Tehran.


The situation is all the more dangerous and unpredictable because the election and its aftermath appears to have surprised all the major players, forcing them to improvise their responses to a fast-changing situation. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Supreme Leader Ayatullah Ali Khamenei appear to have been taken aback by the surge in support for the pragmatic conservative candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi. The decision to hastily announce what many say was an improbable landslide victory for Ahmadinejad touched off an unprecedented wave of protests that have rocked Khamenei, who has since backtracked by ordering an investigation into claims of voter fraud. Despite violent attacks on demonstrators and arrests of political figures, security forces have in the main refrained from unleashing their repressive might on the demonstrators who are openly defying the law. The partial recount of the vote has bought Khamenei time, but the crisis of legitimacy facing those in power grows by the day.(See pictures of Iran's presidential election and its turbulent aftermath.)


Violence and the threat of violence has not deterred the demonstrators, and Mousavi is showing no inclination to back down just yet. Khamenei appears to be scrambling for a compromise that will persuade Mousavi to end the demonstrations while keeping Ahmadinejad in the presidency. But the outcome of the battle of wills may depend on how the key players read the balance of forces on the street and in the councils of the regime. The situation is delicately poised; what follows are four scenarios that could resolve it.


One: Revolution 2.0?
Despite the Twitter-enabled street scenes and revived slogans of Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini's 1979 revolution, a repeat of that successful insurrection remains highly improbable. For one thing, the protest movement is being led by a faction of the Islamic Republic's political establishment, whose members stand to lose a great deal if the regime is brought down and, thus, have to calibrate their dissent. More important, an unarmed popular movement can topple an authoritarian regime only if the security forces switch sides or stay neutral. But Iran's key security forces - the Élite Revolutionary Guards Corps and the Basij militia - are bastions of support for Ahmadinejad. And they have hardly used a fraction of their repressive power. Also, while the opposition draws far larger crowds, there are still millions of Iranians strongly backing Ahmadinejad. So even if the government is unable to destroy the opposition, it's unlikely that the opposition will be in a position to destroy the government. (See pictures of the enduring influence of Ayatullah Khomeini.)


Two: A Tehran Tiananmen?
The harsh language used by Ahmadinejad and the Revolutionary Guards to describe opposition protests - and their invoking of the specter of an Eastern European–style "velvet revolution" backed by the West - appeared to be generating a narrative that would justify a bloody crackdown, a massive use of military force that would terrify the opposition into submission. Clearly, the limited violence unleashed by the Ahmadinejad camp thus far has failed to intimidate Mousavi and his supporters. But while it would almost certainly clear the streets, the "nuclear option" of a Tiananmen Square–style crackdown would be a potentially fatal wound to the regime's own sources of legitimacy - its limited but lively democracy and the backing of Shi'ite clergy. Discord among the mullahs is growing, with some senior clerics like the esteemed house-arrested dissident Ayatullah Hossein-Ali Montazeri publicly condemning Khamenei's handling of the election and warning ordinary soldiers and police officers that they would "answer to God" for any violence against the people. A crackdown would risk reducing a regime built on clerical authority and "managed" democracy to a tyranny on par with the Shah. Khamenei will be reluctant to go that route. But his handling of the political crisis thus far will have deepened long-standing skepticism within the clergy about his abilities as Supreme Leader. A harsh crackdown, even if followed by reforms, would solve an immediate crisis, but at the cost of inflicting a possibly fatal long-term wound on the regime.

Three: Khamenei's "Divine" Retreat?
Khamenei blundered when he yoked his own position as Supreme Leader - which is typically above the factional fray of the regime's politics - so closely to Ahmadinejad. He issued a barely disguised public endorsement of the candidate, and then rushed to proclaim Ahmadinejad's "divine victory" and order all Iranians to accept it. But the mounting instability on the streets appears to have sent Khamenei into retreat, ordering the Guardian Council to investigate claims of electoral fraud. If the combination of escalating street demonstrations and the politicking of Mousavi's backers inside the regime's councils prompts Khamenei to conclude that an Ahmadinejad victory is untenable, he could press the Guardian Council to heed the opposition's demand for a new vote - or, more likely, "adjust" the result so that no candidate has a clear majority, forcing a runoff election between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi. Such a course would be a bitter pill for the Supreme Leader, dealing a body blow to his efforts to install Ahmadinejad and mocking his authority by forcing him to reverse himself. Whatever its outcome, this crisis has badly damaged Khamenei's credibility within the regime, heralding the onset of a bitter backroom struggle in the coming years to choose his successor. As to whether he'll sound the retreat on the election, however, his own preference and the likely tooth-and-nail resistance to any reversal from Ahmadinejad and the security establishment that backs him mean that Khamenei may be more likely to seek a compromise that keeps the incumbent in place. That may require ...


Four: A "Zimbabwe" Option?
The option that would likely hold the most appeal to Khamenei now would be to broker an agreement similar to the one that has kept Zimbabwe's President, Robert Mugabe, in power despite essentially losing an election - by bludgeoning the opposition into settling for an important yet subordinate role in his government. Already, Khamenei has appealed to a sense of national unity and preserving the regime, hoping to cajole the opposition into accepting the results. And at his first press conference following the announcement of his victory, Ahmadinejad reportedly asked his opponents to submit lists of candidates for membership in his Cabinet. Khamenei and Ahmadinejad may be hoping that standing firm and having the Guardian Council affirm his victory after a 10-day recount will produce enough opposition fatigue, which, combined with the threat of violence, will see the protests peter out. By so doing, Khamenei would hope that the pragmatic conservatives - embodied by Mousavi - can be weaned away from the reformists (led by former President Mohammed Khatami) by giving them a stake in a national unity government and promises to moderate Ahmadinejad's style of governance. However, that scenario would come into play only if Mousavi believed that he was losing the battle and risked disaster by keeping his supporters out on the street. Right now, there are no signs that the opposition feels beaten. (Mugabe's opponents settled for the deal only when they had been so pummeled that they could see no hope of unseating him.) Which is why all four options may remain in play while the various camps test one another's strength in the coming days.

[The Overlord]

http://twitter.com/tehranbureau

[Omniferious]

If they can get a more tolerant leadership in there, with Obama in office here, there is extremely real possibility here of burying a 30-year hatchet between our nations.

Homie, you're forgetting something very important about US Foreign Policy in the Middle East/North Africa, an overwhelmingly Muslim region. Our--assuming you're an American as well--military has had a heavy presence in the region for about sixty years now and we've endorsed some serious atrocities. There's no reason any Middle Eastern country should bury the hatchet unless US Foreign Policy radically alters and moves away from profiteering off of the arms build-up in the region as well as propping up the despotic al-Sahd family of Saudi Arabia for a cheap and steady supply of oil.

Not to mention we put the Shah in power, a military despot, who was only overthrown by a religious despot, the Ayatollah. Without US intervention this wouldn't have been a problem, if only we had avoided meddling with foreign governments in countries for their natural resources.

As a point, I love my country, I disapprove of the last sixty years of my country's foreign policy in the Middle East.

[The Overlord]

Homie, you're forgetting something very important about US Foreign Policy in the Middle East/North Africa, an overwhelmingly Muslim region. Our--assuming you're an American as well--military has had a heavy presence in the region for about sixty years now and we've endorsed some serious atrocities. There's no reason any Middle Eastern country should bury the hatchet unless US Foreign Policy radically alters and moves away from profiteering off of the arms build-up in the region as well as propping up the despotic al-Sahd family of Saudi Arabia for a cheap and steady supply of oil.

Not to mention we put the Shah in power, a military despot, who was only overthrown by a religious despot, the Ayatollah. Without US intervention this wouldn't have been a problem, if only we had avoided meddling with foreign governments in countries for their natural resources.

As a point, I love my country, I disapprove of the last sixty years of my country's foreign policy in the Middle East.

Well first of all my name isn't Homie. It's clearly displayed by my avatar.

Secondly, no single revolution or change of head of state is going settle our issues in that corner of the world, there's decades of malpractice there.

Point is, if Iran can get someone more moderate at the reins it's good for everyone. Up until January Iran had Ahmadinejad and we had Bush, and both were just fine with taking their ball and going home. Now that we've got Obama, who's clearly stated he will meet with Iranian leadership, if they get someone sensible in there too, it's a start.

It may be just a step, but it has to start somewhere.

[Omniferious]

Well first of all my name isn't Homie. It's clearly displayed by my avatar.

I apologize if I offended you.

Now that we've got Obama, who's clearly stated he will meet with Iranian leadership, if they get someone sensible in there too, it's a start.

I don't mean to be disrespectful towards you, but I don't think sensible applies to any of the leaders in Iran, due to the brutal theocracy they live in. I think that for there to be sensible leadership, the Ayatollah would have to go. He's just as bad as the Shah was. Mousevi doesn't matter because sure, we'll move away from the brink of war, and maybe some sanctions will get lifted and maybe their human rights record will improve a little bit, but a brutal religious despot will still have de facto control of the region.

[RubySlippers]

Give me a break Iranian-Americans?  >:(

Your either here a citizen of American or a non-citizen and Iranian, one can't be both I find the whole heading offensive.

I would not mind Americans of Iranian descent, but once you become a citizen all your ties to other nations should be over effectively.

As for the Iranian religious government well we will see if it survives, if the people really want change its in their hands take up guns and fight like we did many years ago against England to free our nation.

[Vekseid]

...what?

A person is supposed to sever all friendships and familial ties because they move to a different country?

[Trieste]

My family is Irish-American, and we identify that way when we feel the need. We celebrate it.

My campus has an entire fraternity and sorority celebrating Americans with Greek heritage. They're proud of it.

I'm proud of where I come from, and I don't blame anyone else for having the same pride. If you have a problem with that pride, it's your problem and as far as I (and those like me) are concerned you can take your problem and shove it somewhere I don't have to see it.

As long as we're talking about being offended: your narrow-minded views offend me.

[Oniya]

There are a few perfectly legitimate reasons for having dual citizenship.

[Sho]

Definitely (agreeing with Oniya). Especially if you say, just moved to a country like America. In all likelihood you'll probably return home and having dual citizenship is helpful...not only that, but often, you have family overseas. I'm a third-generation American (my grand-parents moved here respectively from England and Germany) and I still visit them overseas. So, no. I'm not going to forget my ties to the other countries where a large portion of my family still lives.

Anyways, back to the revolution at hand...

I think that the surpression we've seen on the news (shooting of protesters, etc) is atrocious. We'll see were it goes, but America is definitely in a tough situation since we overthrew their first democratically-elected ruler to put the Shah (if this is spelled wrong,  I apologize) back on the throne. Now, we're doing our best not to step on any toes and be seen as 'meddling' by supporting the protesters since Obama still wants to open talks with whoever ends up being the leader of Iran.

It's definitely interesting to watch, and history is being made. As of yet, this is the first time that people have actually spoken out against their leader, who is seen to be the highest authority on earth. From what I've gathered from BBC, of course, so I may be wrong.

Also, it's interesting to watch the crucial role that the internet is playing. Since foreign reporters aren't allowed on the streets in Iran, all of the video is coming from clips that have been taken on phones and posted to sites like Facebook, etc. Technology is a powerful tool. :)

[Banderas]

Very sad video of a female protester shot by the Basij militia during a protest in Tehran.

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Unfortunately, what we're seeing now is the Iranian Government shuttling the press corps out of country, reminiscent of Tiananmen Square in 1989.  I fear another government massacre is in the offing.

BTW, her name was "Neda" (voice).  Rest in peace.

[The Overlord]

I apologize if I offended you.

I don't mean to be disrespectful towards you, but I don't think sensible applies to any of the leaders in Iran, due to the brutal theocracy they live in. I think that for there to be sensible leadership, the Ayatollah would have to go. He's just as bad as the Shah was. Mousevi doesn't matter because sure, we'll move away from the brink of war, and maybe some sanctions will get lifted and maybe their human rights record will improve a little bit, but a brutal religious despot will still have de facto control of the region.

Don't worry about it.


I think the way things are escalating there, it may get the crowds roiled to the point that will need; furious enough to go on the offensive there. I wonder if there may be no choice but to go for broke and attempt the lives of the ruling elite: The clerics won't go out of power willingly, they're going to need to kill them to a man to settle this. If the government continues to shoot protesters, the only recourse is to shock them with casualties they're not prepared to handle, there's going to be a point where the violence can neither be forgiven or left without reprisals.

[The Overlord]

Very sad video of a female protester shot by the Basij militia during a protest in Tehran.

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Unfortunately, what we're seeing now is the Iranian Government shuttling the press corps out of country, reminiscent of Tiananmen Square in 1989.  I fear another government massacre is in the offing.

BTW, her name was "Neda" (voice).  Rest in peace.

Even CNN is playing the hell out of this, and it’s a fairly bloody clip, considering what they play on Western media. I wonder if the protestors just got their martyr and rallying cry; an image can be a very powerful thing.

[Banderas]

I think the way things are escalating there, it may get the crowds roiled to the point that will need; furious enough to go on the offensive there. I wonder if there may be no choice but to go for broke and attempt the lives of the ruling elite: The clerics won't go out of power willingly, they're going to need to kill them to a man to settle this. If the government continues to shoot protesters, the only recourse is to shock them with casualties they're not prepared to handle, there's going to be a point where the violence can neither be forgiven or left without reprisals.

The Mousavi opposition movement needs for two things to happen:  They need to become organized (Mousavi called for a general strike, which has yet to materialize), and they need for government security forces to begin defecting to their side.  As of right now, the Green Movement protesters can do little except run in the face of armed opposition by the Basij Militia.  Allied and sympathetic police units would put an end to the monopoly of violence held by the Basij.  The Iranian military has stayed out of this so far, but I have no doubt the sitting government has prepositioned combat units outside Tehran, Shiraz, etc. to be inserted into the fray if called upon.  I feel the majority of the Iranian population, is sitting on the fence, and while passively supporting Mousavi, is staying removed from the situatin.

Defections of regular police units to the opposition will lend legitimacy to their cause among the fence sitters, who would presently rather continue under the ruling regime rather than die in an impending purge.  Currently, most of the protesters are young adults and students.  Government security defections (whole units, not individuals) will broaden the appeal of the opposition, and  hopefully cause a chain reaction of further unit defections, leaving the Basij as the only armed force in the cities opposing Mousavi.

[The Baron]

Unfortunately I get the feeling that this series of events will not lead to the type of massive shift in Iranian policy that many in the West are hoping for. In our celebrations of massive amounts of change through popular uprising and dissent (our revolutions through out our history, the break up of the Soviet Union) we often forget that a crackdown, often violently so, is what can and does occur in these scenarios.

I fear Tehran is headed for a Tiananmen Square as opposed to Red Square type of ending.

[Apple of Eris]

Give me a break Iranian-Americans?  >:(

Your either here a citizen of American or a non-citizen and Iranian, one can't be both I find the whole heading offensive.

I would not mind Americans of Iranian descent, but once you become a citizen all your ties to other nations should be over effectively.

As for the Iranian religious government well we will see if it survives, if the people really want change its in their hands take up guns and fight like we did many years ago against England to free our nation.

Just FYI, America offers Dual Citizenship, while some countries do not. I direct you to: http://www.newcitizen.us/dual.html

[Rhapsody]

I fear Tehran is headed for a Tiananmen Square as opposed to Red Square type of ending.

Look up Neda Agha-Soltan, if you haven't already heard about it.  I just heard it myself -- watched the video and everything.  She was watching a demonstration opposing the Ayatollah, when she was shot through the heart by government forces.  She lived less than a minute, and every single one of those was captured on a cell phone camera, then uploaded.  Be warned: the video isn't as graphic as some I've seen, but it's pretty bad in its own right.

Her family is not allowed to place a black banner signifying their mourning outside their house, and police forces have broken up and banned public displays of mourning and vigils.  Already, there's parallels being made of her blood-covered face to the famous Tiananmen Square image.  She's pretty much become a martyr, the poster child for the depravities happening over there, and so long as the government tries to keep the lid on that powderkeg by prohibiting public memorials, all they're doing is giving the frustrated and the fed up more reason to despise them.

Edit: Realized she was mentioned a little above.  But I'm not going to edit my post, since I think I said everything I wanted to say about it.

[Jude]

I find this whole thing very beautiful.  Yes, it's tragic that people are dying and being oppressed, but what we're seeing before our eyes is true, organic democracy springing up in the Middle East.  It wasn't something America forced to happen, because you can't force Democracy.  It's a feeling, an inclination.  Something that the people themselves have to decide they're ready to seize.

I hope Iran follows it through and becomes a shining beacon of hope for the rest of the Middle East, and plays a moderating force in that area of the world.  The Iranian people were close to doing this before America meddled in the Middle East with the Iraq War (which resulted in a theocratic power shift) and it's just nice to see the damage we did undone so quickly.

[Zeitgeist]

Theocratic power shift? How so?

Some might say it is the example of the blossoming democracy right next door to Iran that in part provided inspiration to the Iranian people. But of course, we couldn't possibly give the previous administration any kind of credit there now could we.

[Oniya]

The fact that the current administration is balking at the change and the people are standing up for themselves kind of puts the cause of the change in the people's purview.

[Zakharra]

 The fact that Iraq has a democracy had some influence. This however is unique in that the people themselves are standing up against a tryannical theocracy to demand a fair election and against a corrupt government. Which is a rarity in the Middle East.

[Trieste]

Theocratic power shift? How so?

Some might say it is the example of the blossoming democracy right next door to Iran that in part provided inspiration to the Iranian people. But of course, we couldn't possibly give the previous administration any kind of credit there now could we.

Someone didn't remember his logical fallacies. Circumstantial ad hominem: just because the current party in power is different from the previous one does not automagically mean that everyone in support of the current administration is against/hateful of the previous party.

Please to going back to drawing board and trying again, thank you.