Will June 12 Rank As "Game Changing" Day?

[cwjerome]

Very good read from the Weekly Standard

Was this inevitable for a country with such a young median age being ruled by old, out of touch Shia clerics with no real experience outside of their religious debates and mosques?

But more importantly, what does it mean for Iran's future? Mousavi isn?t any different, really, than Ahmadinejad. Perhaps the true importance is that the position of the Guardian Council in Iranian politics has dropped considerably and will not be seen as infallible anymore.

I have to say the political dimension to this is fascinating to a non-Iran expert like me. You have the state media, traditional media, and web/new media, you have the protestors, state police, special forces, you have the rural vs urban, Ayatollah Khameini vs the other mullahs... so many factors and parties, this could be a battle royale.

 

[ProfJohn]

Interesting.

Someone said that Obama is Reagan, Mousavi maybe Gorbachev and we have yet to see who will be Yeltsin.

It makes sense. Mousavi may only be in power long enough to dismantle the religious regime that has ruled Iran for 30+ years and have it replaced with a real democracy.

 

[Craig234]

Weekly Standard falls somewhere below "We lie to you" magazine. No thanks.

 

[Fear No Evil]

STOP MEDDLING IN THE AFFAIRS OF IRAN!!!! Obama has voted present.. what more can we do?!?!

 

[yllus]

The smart money should still be on a coup by the Revolutionary Guard if Khamenei does not stand firm against Mousavi and a repeat of the 1990s. But a coup is not a foregone conclusion.

...

The Guard's commanders, who are among the most ideologically committed Islamists in Iran, certainly would be willing to kill their countrymen to protect the system they cherish.

This is what I base my prediction of "nothing will change" for Iran. I do not believe that without a significant and shocking about-face by senior commanders of Iran's military a counter-revolution can be launched.

I think Mr. Khamenei's best play to keep his head is to continue to soft-shoe the protests - no strong crackdowns, but certainly police harassment of the protesters. Couple that with an agreement to "dialogue" which will initially sound honest but quickly turn to deceit and stonewalling and the public will become confused and have the fire peter out of them.

 

[Moonbeam]

I predict that lots of people like myself who know nothing will none the less rapidly become experts on the subject of Iran as they absorb data from this and that source that corresponds to their understanding of life and what they project out on the world. Very soon, I am sure, I will see in Iran everything that is true of me that I fail there to see.

The glitch in the matrix that Iran has created will successfully be papered over and I will sleep assured that my understanding is complete.

 

[Siddhartha]

The clerics are supporting the election results. For there to be a real revolution in Iran it would mean over turning their theocracy. I do not see that happening anything soon.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
STOP MEDDLING IN THE AFFAIRS OF IRAN!!!! Obama has voted present.. what more can we do?!?!

What more can we do?

 

[dawp]

Originally posted by: Siddhartha

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
STOP MEDDLING IN THE AFFAIRS OF IRAN!!!! Obama has voted present.. what more can we do?!?!

What more can we do?

nuke them from orbit.


weekly standard is not usually on my to read list, but that article is better than most.


I don't think the Iranians will settle for the same old thing any more.

 

[Lemon law]

With my crystal ball in the repair shop, its hard to say if the election of 6/12/09 will be a game changer for Iran, but I sure think their grand Ayatollah has alienated too many with his high handed and autocratic manners. From the links I can find, many powerful groups, including many clerics are questioning the wisdom of keeping the grand Ayatollah in power. The end ramification may take a long time to play out, but I am guessing Iranian reform will win out in the end.

A more astute Ayatollah could have defused the crisis, but when the Grand Ayatollah is supposed to be infallible, its apparent to nearly everyone in Iran that he is very fallible.
And worse yet, his lack of flexibility paints him into a dead end corner he will find hard to get out of.

 

[cwjerome]

Originally posted by: yllus

The smart money should still be on a coup by the Revolutionary Guard if Khamenei does not stand firm against Mousavi and a repeat of the 1990s. But a coup is not a foregone conclusion.

...

The Guard's commanders, who are among the most ideologically committed Islamists in Iran, certainly would be willing to kill their countrymen to protect the system they cherish.

This is what I base my prediction of "nothing will change" for Iran. I do not believe that without a significant and shocking about-face by senior commanders of Iran's military a counter-revolution can be launched.

I think Mr. Khamenei's best play to keep his head is to continue to soft-shoe the protests - no strong crackdowns, but certainly police harassment of the protesters. Couple that with an agreement to "dialogue" which will initially sound honest but quickly turn to deceit and stonewalling and the public will become confused and have the fire peter out of them.

It may be true that without a bigtime about-face by senior commanders a counter-revolution cannot be launched. But maybe a counter-revolution is too much to ask for... I don't see it happening either.

But with current events we may see the infallibility of the Guardian Council broken. It would be nice to have the entire body be revealed as the little tyrants that they are, to remove their legitimacy. Then the population becomes ripe for the truth which will make the Guardian Council a contemptible body, forcing them to use increasing amounts of force just to get normal things done. A counter-revolution no, but the serious beginnings of internal rumblings and turmoil that can lead to the downfall of the theocratic extremists over time, yes.

I want the whole idea of an Islamic Republic run by mullahs to be shown as a complete and utter waste of time and a failure (like another bad political idea, Communism).

 

[cwjerome]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Interesting.

Someone said that Obama is Reagan, Mousavi maybe Gorbachev and we have yet to see who will be Yeltsin.

It makes sense. Mousavi may only be in power long enough to dismantle the religious regime that has ruled Iran for 30+ years and have it replaced with a real democracy.

No, Mousavi is no Gorbachev. He is not much different that the incumbent, and is 100% for the continuation of the nuclear program, support for Hamas and Hezbollah, etc. If he had been elected without incident, not much would have changed.

The best thing that could have happened is what did happen. It exposes the corrupt system, alienates people, and those are the agents that can bring about change.

 

[RedChief]

Mousavi wants something similar to what China has. A open society that is not free.

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Interesting.

Someone said that Obama is Reagan, Mousavi maybe Gorbachev and we have yet to see who will be Yeltsin.

It makes sense. Mousavi may only be in power long enough to dismantle the religious regime that has ruled Iran for 30+ years and have it replaced with a real democracy.

No, Mousavi is no Gorbachev. He is not much different that the incumbent, and is 100% for the continuation of the nuclear program, support for Hamas and Hezbollah, etc. If he had been elected without incident, not much would have changed.

The best thing that could have happened is what did happen. It exposes the corrupt system, alienates people, and those are the agents that can bring about change.

Kind of OT, but what's wrong with Iran developing nuclear energy in accordance with the NPT? Is there *any* evidence that their nuclear weapons program is currently active? AFAIK there is none.

Anyways, Mousavi may not be progressive enough for some, but he would be a big improvement over Ahmadinejad. As long as Khamenei and some of the other clerics are in power, though, there will probably be no significant changes in Iran, no matter who is president. IIRC this is one of reasons Khatami lost in 2005. He promised the people reform but met with significant resistance among the more conservative clerics.

 

[BMW540I6speed]

Will June 12 Rank As "Game Changing" Day? ...

I think so, in a limited basis, a start if you will..

The youth of Iran will never give up seeking power. It's just a truism that the youth always gain power in the end. The gestalt that a generation creates will always find itself in full bloom unless they are wiped out, in which case that culture has no opportunity to proliferate at all. Khameini is not immortal, he is old, and he will die one day. Eventually his replacement will not remember the revolution as a participant. As these shifts happen change occurs. If a large amount of the youth continues on trends toward liberalization, which we see rampant in the cosmopolitan culture of Tehran, then if not them, then their kids will eventually liberalize, not by some sort of revolutionary overthrow, but through the inertia of culture.

Just because Democracy is a sham right now that they will believe that Democracy is ALWAYS a sham. Just because they are not allowed free and fair elections today doesn't mean they will simply give up for a dream of holding actual elections. At a certain point the Mullahs only have so much control over the populace, and to maintain control eventually they have to give concessions lest they find themselves without support amongst anyone but a geriatric based with some influence over some young extremists.

I don't see the people giving up at all. I see them changing tactics from trying to participate in the election to boycotting it, but on the streets of Tehran the culture is changing and the Mullahs do not seem to have the power to stop that.

Some suggestions on how the USA can help with being seen as the "American stooge"

Covert support of the dissidents. I assume this is already happening. However any public promise of support for the opposition would be disastrous. The best thing that can happen for us would be to have a growing percentage of young Iranians in loud opposition to the government - and then become opposed to the Islamic clergy supporting the government also. This might lead to a secular government in the long run.

Another way the U.S. could help would be to send strong signals to the Iranian people that it is ready to enter normal relations and help with immediate financial and humanitarian aid should the current regime be replaced by one with a commitment to human rights and peace.

 

[TheSkinsFan]

Originally posted by: Craig234
Weekly Standard falls somewhere below "We lie to you" magazine. No thanks.

You're right. In fact, I'd like to sign up for your thoughtful newsletter instead. Got link?

I digress...

The situation in Iran is certainly interesting, and I actually appreciate Obama's stand-to-the-side-and-watch approach. I'm fairly confident that the young population of Iran will take care of this sometime in the next 10 to 20 years.

That said, I'm not at all sure what we should do to halt their efforts to build a nuclear weapon. At some point, if the Iranian youth haven't been effective enough, I'm afraid that Israel and/or the U.S. will need to do something a bit more kenetic. An unstable nuclear Iran is pretty damn scary.

As the OP said, it's extremely interesting; but, it's also nerveracking.

 

[jonks]

Fred Barnes (executive editor and all around douchebag) said the Iranian protestors don't remember American meddling in their history (right), and that there is "great doubt" whether Obama supports the protestors or not.

 

[OCGuy]

It is a very interesting situation. However, I dont think everything in life needs to be described with tired sports cliches. Unless our backs are against the wall, and we are in a dog fight. Then I think we should just give 110% and leave everything out on the floor.

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
The best thing that could have happened is what did happen. It exposes the corrupt system, alienates people, and those are the agents that can bring about change.

Absolutely correct. We or the people of Iran would have gotten little to no change from Mr. Mousavi had become President. Even if he was the reformer that he actually isn't, he would get little accomplished with Mr. Khamenei wielding veto power.

Politically, this is a fantastic outcome. It's obvious now beyond any rational doubt that the Iranian representative system is a farce. Iranians themselves are now aware that millions of their fellow citizens desire change. And as the Iranian economy gets worse, the people will assign the responsibility/blame for that to Mr. Ahmadinejad, instead of to the "reformer".

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Interesting.

Someone said that Obama is Reagan, Mousavi maybe Gorbachev and we have yet to see who will be Yeltsin.

It makes sense. Mousavi may only be in power long enough to dismantle the religious regime that has ruled Iran for 30+ years and have it replaced with a real democracy.

No, Mousavi is no Gorbachev. He is not much different that the incumbent, and is 100% for the continuation of the nuclear program, support for Hamas and Hezbollah, etc. If he had been elected without incident, not much would have changed.

The best thing that could have happened is what did happen. It exposes the corrupt system, alienates people, and those are the agents that can bring about change.

Remember that Gorbachev did not set out to destroy the Soviet Union, but to make is stronger by reforming it. Once those reforms started though he lost control.

With the street riots it is possible to think something similar may happen in Iran.
Mousavi may just be step one in a march to democracy.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
With my crystal ball in the repair shop, its hard to say......

What are you talking about? Just a few hours ago you claimed that evidence of Cheney's many (but unknown) criminal acts he's committed over the decades will work its way out any time now. What gives, it works for Cheney, but your crystal ball is defective when it comes to Iran?

 

[cwjerome]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Interesting.

Someone said that Obama is Reagan, Mousavi maybe Gorbachev and we have yet to see who will be Yeltsin.

It makes sense. Mousavi may only be in power long enough to dismantle the religious regime that has ruled Iran for 30+ years and have it replaced with a real democracy.

No, Mousavi is no Gorbachev. He is not much different that the incumbent, and is 100% for the continuation of the nuclear program, support for Hamas and Hezbollah, etc. If he had been elected without incident, not much would have changed.

The best thing that could have happened is what did happen. It exposes the corrupt system, alienates people, and those are the agents that can bring about change.

Remember that Gorbachev did not set out to destroy the Soviet Union, but to make is stronger by reforming it. Once those reforms started though he lost control.

With the street riots it is possible to think something similar may happen in Iran.
Mousavi may just be step one in a march to democracy.

Although what you say about Gorbachev is true, I don't see Mousavi the same way. His beef is with political rivals, not really the system. Mousavi is no friend of the West.

It doesn't matter who is in power with regard to the valuable lesson in Iran. It is impossible to stop the flow of information and that whoever gets the image out first with the most compelling narrative wins - especially one that is emotive. Even dictatorships are really powerless to stop this. They can disrupt and make it difficult for the word/images to get out (such as restricting foreign reporters) but they can't stop the man and woman on the street from texting or emailing out.

The days of the authorities simply seizing the telephone exchange; wireless office and the national radio/television stations to guarantee a media blackout are long over. Technology is definitely a double edged sword, the mullahs had used it effectively to cement their power and to spread their message of "death to America and death to Israel" and now they are seeing it being leveled at them with crowds chanting "death to tyrants."

 

[BarrySotero]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
The days of the authorities simply seizing the telephone exchange; wireless office and the national radio/television stations to guarantee a media blackout are long over. Technology is definitely a double edged sword, the mullahs had used it effectively to cement their power and to spread their message of "death to America and death to Israel" and now they are seeing it being leveled at them with crowds chanting "death to tyrants."

It's hard to muffle all info into and out of Iran but the internet activity in Iran is dropping off a lot. On Twitter more and more posts are in English from people not in Iran. Bloggers and twitterers are getting busted a lot more and proxies are failing:


"Earlier this week, the company identified 2000 open proxy servers that had been posted online to see ?if we could discern patterns in the places that are hosting them. Most of these are no longer reachable from inside Iran, of course, precisely because they were made public.? By the end of last week, Renesys found that only 12 open (or public) proxies in Iran and 11 of those originated from the government itself...

Perhaps the biggest concern, says Cowie, is that the overall number of proxies being created is shrinking. In a posting on Renesys? blog Cowie wrote, ?The rate with which new proxies are being created has slumped over the last few days. It's getting harder and harder to propagate new proxies to the people who need them, as the government consolidates its hold on the filtering mechanisms. Any new proxy addresses that are posted to Twitter, or emailed, will be blocked very quickly.?"

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thewo...ty-to-cyber-snoop.html

One of most relaible Twitters often quoted in news (38,000 followers on Twitter) has been missing. Some last posts where he/she describes a real bloodbath before stopping posts:


"we must go - dont know when we can get internet - they take 1 of us, they will torture and get names - now we must move fast"

"they pull away the dead into trucks - like factory - no human can do this - we beg Allah for save us "

"Lalezar Sq is same as Baharestan - unbelevable - ppls murdered everywhere"

"they catch ppl with mobile - so many killed today - so many injured - Allah Akbar - they take one of us"

"in Baharestan we saw militia with axe choping ppl like meat - blood everywhere - like butcher"

"phone line was cut and we lost internet - #Iranelection - getting more difficult to log into net"

"they were waiting for us - they all have guns and riot uniforms - it was like a mouse trap - ppl being shot like animals"

"so many ppl arrested - young & old - they take ppl away"


"thank you ppls 4 supporting Sea of Green - pls remember always our martyrs - Allah Akbar - Allah Akbar - Allah Akbar"


http://twitter.com/persiankiwi

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: Corn

Originally posted by: Lemon law
With my crystal ball in the repair shop, its hard to say......

What are you talking about? Just a few hours ago you claimed that evidence of Cheney's many (but unknown) criminal acts he's committed over the decades will work its way out any time now. What gives, it works for Cheney, but your crystal ball is defective when it comes to Iran?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corn, you are simply comparing apples to oranges.

In terms of Cheney, its Past actions and certain criminal acts, finding the proof positive that are still are in the hands of his henchman is what is needed to prove them beyond any shadow of a doubt.

With Iran we are dealing with future acts that may or may not occur, and how those future actions play out and in which sequence, is what will later tell what this disputed election means in the grander sweep of time. Right now, we may think the Iranian protests are only driven from street protesters, we will soon see the debate go the the legislature and even into the inner circle of mullahs. Our Battle of Bunker hill, maybe the start of the American revolution, had been brewing for a long time and was driven by many prior acts.

Sad to say, it often takes better than a dozen years to bring the average war criminal to the bar of justice, too damn long IMHO, but still par for the course. Cheney may not live long enough, but rest assured, its on borrowed time.

 

[BrownTown]

Talk of an impending Iranian democratic revolution is one of those things I remember hearing about all my life, but so far has only been a story. I see no reason why this time will be any different. I guess what it boils down to is the fact that while there is a certain segment of the population that supports more liberal reforms the is a much larger portion that does not. ITs usually put as a young verse old thing, but I would have to think that the poor young people are much more traditional than the more liberal university students that are out there supporting democratic blogs and stuff.