« Freedom? | Libertine's Blog | Hey TPM...we got Israel covered like a blanket. How 'bout the rest of the Middle-east? »
Iran - what's next?
If it is true that there was widespread and massive fraud in the Iranian elections I think the US, through the auspices of the UN, should push for international review to check the legitimacy of the results.
If the election was fixed it is a serious misstep for the ruling mullahs in Iran. It damages the credibility of a government it appears the Iranian people are growing tired of. If the current regime in Tehran can be taken down by the Iranian people themselves before their current government's nuclear aspirations come to fruition it would be a best case scenario. This is a golden opportunity to weaken a regime, and hasten its demise, without US forces having to fire a single shot. And if the US can push this issue with the UN and the world on behalf of the Iranian people. I don't think it would be viewed as US meddling by the Iranian people but as a welcome assist. And probably even engender a higher level of goodwill towards the US from the Iranian people.
The US, through President Obama's Inauguration Address and his speech in Cairo, extended our hand to the Iranian people and the Iranian people weren't allowed to unclench their fist and grasp that hand even though they wanted to. This is definitely a case where a wrong should be attempted to be righted...and keep extending our hand to them and let them be safe in the knowledge that we know they tried to reciprocate. Eventually they will push aside what is preventing them from taking the first small step in the journey they want to take on what will still be a long path to peace.
If the election was fixed it is a serious misstep for the ruling mullahs in Iran. It damages the credibility of a government it appears the Iranian people are growing tired of. If the current regime in Tehran can be taken down by the Iranian people themselves before their current government's nuclear aspirations come to fruition it would be a best case scenario. This is a golden opportunity to weaken a regime, and hasten its demise, without US forces having to fire a single shot. And if the US can push this issue with the UN and the world on behalf of the Iranian people. I don't think it would be viewed as US meddling by the Iranian people but as a welcome assist. And probably even engender a higher level of goodwill towards the US from the Iranian people.
The US, through President Obama's Inauguration Address and his speech in Cairo, extended our hand to the Iranian people and the Iranian people weren't allowed to unclench their fist and grasp that hand even though they wanted to. This is definitely a case where a wrong should be attempted to be righted...and keep extending our hand to them and let them be safe in the knowledge that we know they tried to reciprocate. Eventually they will push aside what is preventing them from taking the first small step in the journey they want to take on what will still be a long path to peace.
Advertisement
The US must not get involved in anyway for now. It would only provide political ammunition to Khamenei and Ahmadinejad that the "west" is fueling political unrest.
This whole situation smells of early civil war at this point.
I just hope that what comes out of it in the end is better than what has existed the last 30 yrs. That is, I hope succession by Mousavi and Rafsanjani reformers brings true change from the status quo.
June 14, 2009 8:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Just so you do not start talking about flowers being laid at the feet of the interferors. hahahaha
June 14, 2009 9:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Probably better if France and the EU pushed and we back them up, Libertine.
I agree there should be broad international support on behalf of the Iranian People. I just wish we had that kind of support in 2000, and 2004.
June 14, 2009 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
That is fine Bwak...and actually along the lines of what I was thinking. I don't think it should be the US taking the lead in this. But it is high time sham elections are called what they are. I think it would give the reformers/opposition in Iran support to make their case to the rest of their countrymen...
June 14, 2009 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I tend to agree with Corpiscator that the best approach for now is to sit back and see what the Iranians themselves do. US or other international intervention could cause Iranians to rally around Ahmadinejad out of national pride. I think it's better to take a hands-off approach unless the Iranian opposition comes out and directly asks us or the international community to intervene. In that latter case, we should get involved, but as an invited guest rather than a foreign interloper.
June 14, 2009 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
So let me get this right. If there is clear evidence of election fraud the US and the rest of the world should sit back and do nothing? No one should question the results lest the world would be guilty of meddling in the affairs of a legitimately elected government?
June 14, 2009 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Libertine, the Iranians are a proud people and there's a long history of the "international community" (i.e., Britain and the US) interfering in their internal politics to bad end. They're quite sensitive, for this reason, about interference and, when pushed by the international community, they tend to rally around their nation and its leaders (even if they don't fully like those leaders). I think for these reasons it's best to wait and see if a movement against the current regime develops indigenously. Of course, if an indigenous movement does start, we should be quite ready to support it in any way they ask.
I do think we also need to be sensitive to the fact that the Iranians are a bit ambiguous in their feelings toward their Islamic leadership. They are proud of the 1979 revolution, which was a popular uprising against the US/British-backed dictator. The leaders they have now were brought into power by that popular revolution. These leaders, for all their faults and increasing unpopularity, are therefore not seen quite so simply by the Iranians as their oppressors. It's a complex climate and we tend to prove ourselves a bit tone deaf when we start trying to muddle in these affairs. For this reason, it may be better to hang back awhile, see what happens, and respond if and when the Iranian opposition asks for our help.
June 14, 2009 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I fully understand what you are saying about the history Purple and fully agree with your assessments about the Iranian people and the complexities of their society. But there be many people in that country who feel their side prevailed and the reported returns were fraudulent. The only thing I am suggesting is for the international community to ask that the opposition parties in Iran are able to have a full review of the election results. No meddling just making sure the result was legit. I have heard pleas to the international community from Mousavi and others in Iran not to directly intercede but to help the reform parties in their efforts to put pressure on the government for an accounting.
June 14, 2009 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, and I definitely agree that if the reform parties ask us for help, we should do so in the appropriate (not too heavy-handed way)--still being sensitive to the fact that the Iranian populace is divided and Amadenijad does apparently have a significant amount of popular support even if it turns out not to be the majority support the government's suspect election tally suggests.
June 14, 2009 5:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really do agree with you on treading lightly part.
Yeah but if Mousavi's claim to 60% of the vote is accurate it isn't nearly as evenly divided. Do just enough that Mousavi, and his supporters, can get as full an accounting as possible...no more, no less.
June 14, 2009 6:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish I knew more about the attitudes of Iranians outside the large cities. Sadly, we have so little access to Iranians outside Tehran (we have little enough to Iranians inside Tehran!), it's hard to know whether it's possible for Amadenijad's support to be much stronger outside the capital than it is within the capital. Not knowing what the attitudes of people outside Tehran are makes me reluctant to draw too many conclusions about the election. I just don't know. I'd be delighted to see a massive movement toward reform in Iran--but I'm cautious because I'm not close enough to know how all Iranians--especially those outside the educated urban classes we sometimes meet in America--feel.
June 14, 2009 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Again good points and I agree. Iranian society outside of Tehran is a very closed society. Like the way China's used to be.
I really doubt that Ahmadinejad's support outside of the cities could have been that strong that he won in a landslide. Hell I even hear according to the results that Ahmadinejad carried Tehran proper!!! I see red flags everywhere I look after this 'election'.
But culturally Iran does seem to remind me of the US in one way...the cities are more liberal and the rural areas more conservative. And did you see the protests in Gary Sick's post from tonight with the video embed. I was really struck by how large that protest was...it was on a larger scale then I expected. And it didn't look like it was just students and young people. Look at the video if you get a chance...I saw what looked like genuine grass roots Iranian style.
June 14, 2009 10:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is the U.S. so corruption-free that we have any international credibility? Especially when it comes to elections? We overthrew the first democratically-elected leader of Iran. We have our own history of stealing elections, and lying our way into wars and occupations and breaking international law, committing torture, bribing certain regimes, selling arms to all factions, faking intelligence about Iraq and Iran's nuclear capabilities.
Seriously, who are we to pressure any other government for accountability?
June 14, 2009 5:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with about our credibility in general and specifically with Iran. That is exactly why the UN needs to be on the point for this one.
June 14, 2009 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is the UN a beacon of fairness? Maybe it's all we got but seriously, I see a crisis of trust in all organizations.
June 14, 2009 7:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not as cynical. I keep on hearing how no government or bureaucracy can/should be trusted. Is the UN perfect? No, far from it, but, like the US and our democracy we have, it is the best option we have right now...and it can be made more effective if an effort is made to make it so.
June 14, 2009 9:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where's J.C. when you need him? (the other J.C.- Jimmy Carter). Libertine, we elected G.W. Bush twice, for crissakes, and I didn't hear anybody challenging those election resul... umm, nevermind.
Of course, it's quite possible that the Iran elections were on the up and up. Ahmadinejad was elected before with a lot of support from the poor, based on his domestic policy.
June 14, 2009 5:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
They could have been on the up and up...but it is not in Iran's track record to have fully fair elections, even if they have never gone this far before. Plus with the mullahs nuclear aspirations there is an incentive for them not to see a reformer gain power. Then when I hear the analysis of people like Juan Cole and others who follow the region quite closely indicates something isn't right with this result. And add to that the announcement that Ahmadinejad won the election 2 hours before the polls closed in a country with a very low tech election system. Too many questions...
June 14, 2009 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I don't disagree. Jes sayin' there seems to be little inside reporting on this. And like you say, they have a poor track record. Is this just a bit more poorly secured than previous elections or a real theft of large magnitude; a foolish and desperate attempt by the hardliners to reassert control at a time when the elite (at least) want a more open and secular-controlled government to reach out to the West? Even Dr. Cole says he's going on gut instinct here. I think it's too early to say one way or another.
June 14, 2009 11:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep...I agree Don.
But I think Cole and many Iran watchers are onto something. Add to it that a communication blackout was put into place right after the election and it seems to have all the makings. This needs to be slowly and responsibly followed. Something is happening there...something within the people themselves. The worst thing would be direct outside intervention which would give the regime cause to crush the reformers but the results should still be questioned. Between the staged victory rally and their heavy handed tactics after the election it appears the mullahs think something is afoot there too.
June 15, 2009 12:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
What if the UN had gotten involved in the two elections that were stolen here? That would be 2000, when the swing-state Florida disenfranchised Gore voters and the Supreme Court, which had no standing, appointed a poseur as President; and 2004, where exit polls throughout the entire country were accurate except in swing-state, Diebold machine voting Ohio, (after the Diebold executive promised to deliver the election to Bush)?
Frankly, I wish they had. Think of all the dead and maimed people who would be alive today if the UN had stepped in and declared our election void. But really -- how would that have gone over?
We have no business sticking our noses in this election -- Jimmy Carter, maybe but not our country. After all, it was the good ol' US of A that helped depose a democratically elected president in Iran so that we could put our puppet, the Shah into "office."
While I am on this tear, I will also say that we have no business saying who can and who cannot have nukes. We are the only country to have ever used them, and we did that on civilians. We close our eyes to the fact that Israel has them; we didn't even care when our concubine, Pakistan sold nuclear secrets to every terrorist with the money to pay for them -- the seller of all that is free as a bird, by the way.
Iran would be foolish NOT to pursue nukes. It may be the only way to protect themselves from their loose-cannon neighbors, the Israelis.
We need to stop being such hypocrites!
If the Iranian people appeal to us, which is what I am hearing, that is the one reason for us to go to the UN to try to overturn this election.
June 14, 2009 6:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
So true, Cville. The whole United States hypocrisy thing is really coming to a head, more so in this decade than any other. Is it that we've become a lot worse?
On almost every issue that comes up in the middle east, elections, nukes, selling arms to terrorists, supporting and bribing certain terrorist groups, invasion of citizen's rights, indefinite detention and torture camps run by the state, we are guilty. Some even boast about that guilt.
Will the real legacy of the Bush administration be that it marked that turning point in history when the United States completely lost its moral footing in the eyes of the world?
June 14, 2009 8:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
The answer to your last question is in our hands.
June 14, 2009 8:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is precisely why we must hold those complicit in committing war crimes accountable.
June 14, 2009 9:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Again, though I am joining this particular part of the discussion late, I agree with you.
I am not saying the US, UN or anyone should tell a people who should be ruling them. I am saying in this case it could be a case that a people did chose and they are not being listened to. Hey, if it was a legit election and they chose Ahmadinejad, so be it. But there is serious doubt that was the actual result...but it has nothing to do with who you, I, the US or the rest of the world want.
And as an aside on the nuke issue...I think no country should have them. Shame on humanity for inventing and proliferating them in the first place.
June 14, 2009 9:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you too Libertine. I went a little tangential here in my last few comments, sorry about that:)
June 14, 2009 9:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
No need to apologize and feel free to go tangential as often as you want to...I feel it makes for livelier discussions and often new ways of looking at an topic.
June 14, 2009 9:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure we have any idea what is going on over there. Tehran is different than elsewhere. Who says they don't have their own red state v blue state thing going on over there? The last thing anyone needs is social chaos and any kind of war let alone civil war in Iran. The prudent thing to do at this point is to do nothing, wait, watch, listen. When we know what is going on then perhaps we can start deciding what we might do or not to push things in a progressive direction.
Personally, I think the Iranian people have always been our friends, but we spit in the face of the Iranian nation so forcefully and for so long that we actually caused many of them to fear us to the point of never being able to trust us. They are a wise people. To this day I am not convinced that the US government harbors any ideas or plans with respect to Iran that have anything to do with the well being and security of Iran or its people.
I would like to see the vision of Mossadegh be put in place in Iran and to come to terms with and establish a friendship with Iran on an equal and respectful footing. The one thing the US should always do regarding Iran is to keep our noses out of their business. If we start hearing the name of Mossadegh and if we start seeing his image publicly in Iran we will know the time of the Mullahs is nearing an end. They fear the spectre of Mossadegh more than anything else becuase he not only was the great symbol of opposition to the Shah's regime, but he is also the great symbol of opposition to any medieval regime such as that run by the Mullahs.
June 14, 2009 11:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oleeb...as usual you say it more articulately and eloquently then I can. Thanks for weighing in here... 8-)
I agree with everything you have to say here. Our history with Iran is abysmal. The last thing I think would help is the US directly trying to intercede in this. But no reason we can't take a back channel lead, especially if there is credible evidence that this election was fixed. I fully agree that the Iranian people should be left to run their own country and should be recognized. Iran is poised to become the dominant power in the region even without a nuclear arsenal. I think the only choice we have is engagement. Eventually the Iranian people, the proud Persians they are, will throw off the rule of the mullahs and hopefully we will be ready to engage them as part of the world community as respectfully as we would treat any other nation in the world community.
June 14, 2009 11:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I'm not sure we have any idea what is going on over there."
I believe this statement also applies to the media. Iran has been such a blackhole of information and understanding for so long that it is difficult to appreciate what has happened in the last three days.
The one thing we can do is promote all sources of media that may available. The truth will eventually come out. I just hope it will not be too late.....aka Tiananmen. Incidentally, tehran bureau seems to be conveniently offline.
The Obama administration should continue to remain vaguely silent in spite of the EU's acceptance. Silence speaks volumes
June 15, 2009 12:25 AM | Reply | Permalink