Political Discussions
Iran
Posted by clioandme • 6/15/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: iran
Is anyone else on the edge of their seats over the developments in Iran? Too much is happening, too much is in flux for me to say anything meaningful about the situation, but maybe we could collect information here.
Of course, there are two ways to go at this, one from the point of view of Iran's domestic politics, the other in terms of American foreign policy. Frankly, it is probably too early to talk about our policy, since we have to wait and see how the situation in Iran plays out. We have to know who we will be dealing with in what domestic political context. (I mean the domestic political situation in Iran.) I do think Obama is right to wait it out. The appearance of interference is to be avoided.
User Comments
-
I think it is very uplifting to see the people standing up to their government and for their voices to be heard. gives me some hope in knowing that maybe the muslim world wants their own freedom like us.-
what does freedom like yours look like? -
What does that question mean exactly Nomadic?
-
-
sounds like the youth is rebelling against the warhawkish theocratic welfare state... kinda like America during the 60's o_0 -
I do think that there is far too much in play right now, but this may be the one step too far that pushed Iranian citizens into rebellion. Whether that is horrifically quashed, runs out of steam, or actually creates change we simply can't yet predict. -
"It is like John Adams definition of a republic... an empire of laws and not of men. But as laws may be bad as well as good, an empire of laws may be the best of all governments or the worst of all tyrannies" -- Thomas Paine
-
You're right, Mark - there is a lot going on and it may be some time before we get the full picture. Over at Huffpost, there is a live blog stream going on, which has probably the best on-the-scenes raw coverage anywhere.
In a way it reminds of the protests in East Germany, back in the 80s, that led up to the dismantling of the Berlin wall. Whatever happens with Iran, I hope the outcome is positive and the people really can take back their government. -
I decided I shouldn't let the day go by without at least saying something about this event on my poor, neglected blog. Some rhetoric of Iran's current president really floored me, so I commented (markstoneman.wordpress.com/2009/06/15/mahmoud-ahmadinejad/). Of course, there is much more to be said, but by people better informed than me. Meanwhile I watch and read with bated breath.
-
What's remarkable is the similarities between right-wingers and left-wingers in Iran compared with those here, albeit it's taken to the extreme over there. But at least Iranians haven't become as complacent as people here. They're out in the streets protesting.
We came dangerously close to an authoritarian regime here a few years ago and a large percentage of the people still gobble up the propaganda. We're not out of the woods yet. -
A few similarities in rhetoric are striking, but the differences in culture and system are many and significant. Which is not to say that a democracy should ever take anything for granted.
-
@satjournal: They're reversed. Left-wingers in Islamic Countries are almost identical to American Repulblicans and Rigth-Wingers would be the Christian Left on cocaine, pro-labor, pro-stoning.
-
-
Here's an interesting piece on Ayatollah Ali Khamenei at the NYT: "In Iran, an Iron Cleric, Now Blinking," www.nytimes.com/2009/06/16/world/middleeast/16cleric.html. It gives an interesting sense of the politics involved in the making of a supreme leader, something I knew nothing about.
-
Social media and the protest in Iran: www.nytimes.com/2009/06/16/world/middleeast/16media.html
-
Andrews Sullivan did a good job of covering the twitter revolution segment of it, and there are many opinions on that. Wronging Rights has a nice interview with a friend who had spoken to a relative in Iran and it mimics what a friend of mine whose family lives in Iran told me today also. The young have had something foisted on them they don't want it is interesting to see this happening. I wish them well. This is similar - ok maybe not similar but close enough to what was going t happen in Iraq had we not gone in - granted it was a year away or so but it was going to happen.
Whose knows what will happen in this case, but I am finding it interesting to observe. Iranians here though at least the ones I've talked to are hoping against hope that it is real revolution.
There is no reason for us to get involved. Unless we are getting something from Iran it is unlikely we will get involved.-
I agree about us not getting involved. It would be counterproductive, no matter how well intentioned or what the outcome. (Foreign influence and all that. How would we react to foreign influence in our process?)
-
-
Time will tell. I'm impressed that Twitter canceled its scheduled downtime to allow the protesters to stay in contact.
news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10265213-2.html -
Interesting "Big Picture" feature in the Boston Globe: www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/06/irans_disputed_election.html
(hat tip: twitter.com/frontlineblog) -
Another modest post on my own blog. No news, just some thoughts about a potentially revolutionary dynamic. markstoneman.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/the-fast-pace-of-time-in-iran/
Any blog posts by any of you?
If you're on twitter, by the way, you'll see a bunch of green avatars in support of those marching and wearing green in Iran. Perhaps it has not meaning in the greater scheme of things, but it's good to know so many are paying attention. For me it is *the* story, even if it is registering narry a blip in some quarters. -
With Khameni backing the old fraudulent election results, things might be getting more dangerous, not just for the protesters however. Why would the leaders of a people that has experienced revolution think that they are immune from the same possibility? markstoneman.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/ayatollah-ali-khamenei/
-
Useful analysis of where we are now at the BBC: news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8109972.stm
-
Juan Cole has got some interesting posts about the current situation on his blog: www.juancole.com/
-
I've heard some suggest millitary intervention on behalf of the protesters...
The U.S. can never help a country become a fully free constitutional democracy. The King of France did, and look what happened to him!-
Considering we overthrew Iran's democratically elected government in 1953, we're not really in any position to dictate democracy to them. Add to that, our 2000 election debacle.
-
-
We don't need to send the troops in, but there is plenty our government could do behind the scenes. I just hope this isn't an opportunity lost. A democratic Iran would be the best thing that could happen in the war against terror.
-
@sati - saying that because of actions nearly 60 years ago, we have no business talking about democracy, is as silly as saying that we cannot speak out against slavery because we once had slaves in America. Times change, people learn (hopefully, anyway) and the country moves forward.
-
-
i've been religiously following the events since sunday and i'm frustrated and irritated each day. i believe the students have fared the worst, and the media has covered their unfortunate plight so meagerly. when dormitories were ransacked immediately following the allegations, no one bothered to mention how brutally conducted the search was.
more irritating is obama's silence. i understand that any refutation of ahmadinejad's landslide victory or direct criticism of the elections will provoke immediate backlash from the iranian government, but someone has to severely condemn any violation of human rights. i know that obama has recently expressed some form of condemnation, but it's a little too late. it should have begun much earlier when students were practically held as prisoners, beaten, and forced to suffocate from tear gas while their rooms were destroyed in order to arrest an extremely small population of activists.
hundreds of thousands of voices are systematically silenced because we don't want to "meddle." we've meddled quite a lot already and we've dealt with more than just a bit of backlash from iran; criticizing outright violations of human rights committed by the very person who represents his country and is obligated to do the best for his country isn't meddling, it's moral duty, not political. america has done worse than meddle, it has invaded, killed, and displaced countless people. a simple statement against the violation of human rights may further complicate political matters which can always be rectified somehow sometime. you can't rectify dead people.
i'm devastated, to say the least.-
If the crackdown gets really ugly, Obama will have to speak out. Meanwhile, it is important to remember that nuclear proliferation is the primary concern of the US, not democracy. We will have to deal with whoever comes out of this, though that might be hard to do, if Ahmadinejad lacks all legitimacy or if he proves himself to be an even bigger monster than we thought. Khamenei's taking sides in such a brazen fashion won't make it easier. Still, we have to think of each side as the possible winner.
More to the point, the US has got such a lousy record of interference in that country, going all the way back to the 1950s, that the president really can't be seen to be interfering. Indeed, that could only create an excuse for even worse crackdowns. Bush's rhetoric helped out Ahmadinejad the first time around. i see no reason why we should do him the favor again.
No, I think Obama is handling things in the right manner, though I also understand individual citizens who want to stand up and be heard. And a lot are, as is evidenced by the growing number of green avatars on twitter, for example. Hopefully many are blogging too, though I am not seeing posts appear in this thread, unfortunately. -
I note that Obama is speaking to one concrete issue: violence. He spoke yesterday and again today. Here's today's bit at the BBC: news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8111242.stm
This level makes sense to me. He's not taking sides in any overt fashion, but he can still stand on a basic principle. -
Yes, dissuading Iran from continuing its uranium enrichment program is an important concern to keep in mind. However, America has spent too much time on this issue. It is clear now more than ever that it simply won't go away especially if Ahmadinejad, backed by Khamenei, remains in power. When will America realize that an Iran, led by a tyrant, will never bend to any demand made by the West, the UN, the rest of the world no matter how much America is willing to negotiate? I don't see the value in maintaining silence on a topical issue that has clearly affected and destroyed lives. Their nuclear program still hasn't killed anyone and we continue to treat it with grave importance as if it already has; I think that's ridiculous. I absolutely agree that it should be our concern, but if we continue to focus on hypothetical problems, then we can't possibly solve anything happening at the moment.
I don't think Obama's statements should be political, and for the most part, they haven't been; that much I applaud him for, but the infrequency of those statements deserves criticism. He stated that freedom of speech and assembly are universal values. That the Iranian government will view this as meddling frightens Obama, but the current regime, as we all very well know, will invariably interpret this as interference no matter how unpoliticized the statement actually is.
The crackdown has been ugly for a time now. Attacks have been ubiquitous since allegations surfaced last week. The media barely covered events (especially at the universities) during its initial stages.
Obama's statements against violence will not be viewed as political by anyone who truly believes that those rights are universal. Making more statements like the recent ones might actually cool some of those vehement republicans in the states and give a sense of confirmation to those whose convictions are slowly being eroded by ceaseless random violence.
There is absolutely nothing overt about reproaching violations of human rights. If that is his basic principle, then he should make it louder, clearer, and more frequent.
-
-
When Mir-Hossein Mousavi says...
"The issue of non-compliance with Iranian rules and regulations is the biggest problem that the country is currently faced with,"
...what does that mean?-
Is there more to this quote? -
I think this NY Times piece might shed light on it: www.nytimes.com/2009/06/21/weekinreview/21worth.html
Mousavi is no revolutionary, or at least wasn't one. He's an insider, and the idea was simply to get the regime to play by its own self-proclaimed rules, here its election procedures. For example, in the past each side had witnesses present when the ballots were counted. Not now.
By the way, I found this post on the Friday sermon helpful for understanding Khamenei: www.juancole.com/2009/06/live-blogging-khameneis-friday-sermon.html
A lot more has appeared since then too, of course. -
@LL
not that I can tell. And I don't know if he means the Iranian equivelent of Rule of Law, or if he means Islamic Cultural matters... or if there's a difference... idk
-
-
I'm not sure if waiting till June 29th is right, but that is the day of a special Bogger Unite thing: www.bloggersunite.org/event/free-iran
-
It kind of amazes me that Mousavi now finds himself in such a position considering he supported the 79 revolution. These people were not protesting the regime so much as the voter fraud which now seems assured. The wanted the regime to change the way it reacts to the rest of the world hence voting Mousavi not the crazy ass other guy. This I think has turned into a bit of something else though, as it develops.
-
IMHO - and this is just as an outside observer, I believe you are right that what it was first about was the election, cooper. But now it has a life of its own. There are a lot of years of pent up oppression over there in Iran. This may just get a lot worse before it gets better.
-
Oh for sure. I have a few Iranian friends with family there and I think that they are surprised to see it has developed into what it has. One of my first blogger reads was a women who was from Iran though, she lived now in sf and spent some years in Spain. Her family is from Iran and from her I learned much to, such as the family discord when some chose to leave Iran due to a regime the kids disliked but the parents were devoted to.It is much more complicated than I know or can speak of.
If Mousavi had won things would have changed, but slowly. That was really all they wanted a few weeks ago. The worst thing that could have happened to the current regime is the voter fraud, and it seems now almost certain it was voter fraud. Now, who knows what will happen. -
Khamenei has certainly helped this to become about the whole system. He hasn't played this well at all.
-
But we know that Mousavi is willing to play ball with the West... after his part in Iran-Contra and all
-
I saw this on Flopping Aces -
"TEHRAN, Iran – A backstage struggle among Iran’s ruling clerics burst into the open Sunday when the government said it had arrested the daughter and other relatives of an ayatollah who is one of the country’s most powerful men."
Here is the link to FA and then the following two links are from the sources of the post:
www.floppingaces.net/2009/06/21/rafsanjani-seeking-to-end-role-of-supreme-l...
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090621/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_election
threatswatch.org/rapidrecon/2009/06/regime-change-iran-movement-se/
So things indeed look to be huge. I know a lot of people call him a neo-con, but Mark Ledeen talked about this in his book, The Terror Masters. The Iranian people so want to be out from under this oppressive regime, I just hope our government will show them that they are not alone. There is so much that we (gov't.) can do behind the scenes to offer aid and support. Please let this be a chance that isn't overlooked... -
I tried to add this part to my post, but the update button wouldn't work....odd. Anyway, here is part of the story from ThreatsWatch.org:
"Folks, this is huge. Huge. A report from Saudi Arabia's al-Arabiya, Iranian clerics seek supreme leader alternative, indicates that Rafsanjani is seeking to eliminate the Supreme Leader. Not just the man, but the position and role presiding over Iranian politics and the Iranian society.
Religious leaders are considering an alternative to the supreme leader structure after at least 13 people were killed in the latest unrest to shake Tehran and family members of Ayatollah Rafsanjani were arrested amid calls by former President Mohammad Khatami for the release of all protesters.
Iran's religious clerks in Qom and members of the Assembly of Experts, headed by former President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, are mulling the formation of an alternative collective leadership to replace that of the supreme leader, sources in Qom told Al Arabiya on condition of anonymity.
Skipping down a bit, here's what they seem to have in mind, obviously a bit sketchy at this point.
Members of the assembly are reportedly considering forming a collective ruling body and scrapping the model of Ayatollah Khomeini as a way out of the civil crisis that has engulfed Tehran in a series of protests,
The discussions have taken place in a series of secret meetings convened in the holy city of Qom and included Jawad al-Shahristani, the supreme representative of Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who is the foremost Shiite leader in Iraq.
An option being considered is the resignation of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as Iran's president following condemnation by the United States and other European nations for violence and human rights violations against unarmed protestors."
So you can see the importance of how this is handled by not only our government, but the European nations, as well. -
Am I understanding this correctly? The former leader of Iran (who allegedly won this election?) is willing to step down from - and eliminate - the position he held, in favor of a collective government system, if the US (and England?) condemns him?
Is this a correct (albeit uber-simplified) interpretation of what I just read?
*head hurts* -
I think it is more of a case of some of the more, for lack of a better word, 'moderate' Mullahs are taking up for the protesters. As far as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stepping down, it is more like a division in the powers that are in control. They are considering having him step down, but I don't know. My head kinda hurts, too. At least that is my take on it.
-
I can see their point. Pretty sure that murduring Muslim women in cold blood is a no-no in the Koran.
...well, except for adulterers
-
-
Iran is one of the countries of the world that is depicted in the western societies' media only through what seems to be the obvious and dismal reality of such country. Current headlines warning about Iranian nuclear programme, the president who is making outrageous statements on daily basis causing fear to those living in democratic societies are mostly why such a small number of people is trying to dig bellow the surface and learn more about Iran. Ban put on all the social networks thus preventing people to connect and share thoughts and opinions, no freedom of information nor speech are keeping youth of Iran in a strange kind of vacuum. If you want to learn more about Censorship in Iran and how it effects their society, if you are interested in hearing a different kind of voice talking about Iran and Iranians, you should read The Age of Nepotism, the book by Vahid razavi, or visit the site www.theageofnepotism.com
-
More people voted than there are people:
Iran's Guardian Council has suggested that the number of votes collected in 50 cities surpass the number of people eligible to cast ballot in those areas.
The council's Spokesman Abbas-Ali Kadkhodaei, who was speaking on the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) Channel 2 on Sunday, made the remarks in response to complaints filed by Mohsen Rezaei -- a defeated candidate in the June 12 Presidential election.
"Statistics provided by the candidates, who claim more than 100% of those eligible have cast their ballot in 80-170 cities are not accurate -- the incident has happened in only 50 cities," Kadkhodaei said.
www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=98711§ionid=351020101
Only 50 cities?-
I suppose this relates to their random sampling, assuming they actually did one and aren't sticking to some sort of script.
-
It's surprising that this information was made public.
-
If it's a script, it is like pretending that the system is transparent, even though this year candidates' representatives were not allowed to witness the counting, in contrast to previous years. To me it is more about the appearance of legality than anything real. And yet this concern for appearances relates to very real expectations on the part of the public. It seems to me that the system either has to fulfill that promise, or it has to throw out the democratic trappings altogether and rule by oppression alone.
Problem is, the government has let things go so far that I'm not sure that playing by the rules will be enough anymore.
-
-
Here's a report on a new study making a case for the election being stolen: features.csmonitor.com/globalnews/2009/06/22/was-iran’s-election-stolen-n...
-
Now things are getting really crazy:
TEHRAN—The family, clad in black, stood at the curb of the road sobbing. A middle-aged mother slapped her cheeks, letting out piercing wails. The father, a frail man who worked as a doorman at a clinic in central Tehran, wept quietly with his head bowed.
Minutes before, an ambulance had arrived from Tehran's morgue carrying the body of their only son, 19-year-old Kaveh Alipour.
On Saturday, amid the most violent clashes between security forces and protesters, Mr. Alipour was shot in the head as he stood at an intersection in downtown Tehran. He was returning from acting class and a week shy of becoming a groom, his family said.
Upon learning of his son's death, the elder Mr. Alipour was told the family had to pay an equivalent of $3,000 as a "bullet fee"—a fee for the bullet used by security forces—before taking the body back, relatives said.
online.wsj.com/article/SB124571865270639351.html-
I wonder if this is true.
-
-
Death to Theocracy!
-
It's difficult not to suspect that given America's history in foreign interference, that they are not largly responsible for this current uprising. They could probably see that the election would be fixed and what the result would be and so set to work behind the scenes long ago. Am I getting carried away here?-
Yes. You are giving the US far too much credit. It has no influence in Iran. This is purely a domestic thing in Iran. The people on each side are fighting over the legacy of the Iranian Revolution of 1979. No one is doing any bidding of the US.
-
I'm not so sure about the no influence thing. It's been said that when the U.S. swung radically to the right, that influenced Iraq to also swing to the far right and elect Akmadinajad. They wanted their own nut-job to counter the bullying by the U.S. Now it looks like they're stuck with him.
-
We also armed Iraq during the 80s during the Iran/Iraq war, which may have fueled anti-U.S. sentiment. And of course, we overthrew their democratically elected government back in the 50s.
-
Um, Ahmadinejad is the President of Iran, not Iraq.
And I believe that the protesters in Iran are seeing their neighbors in Iraq having elections and new freedoms and that may have had some influence in the large voter turnout and their disgust in their voice being silenced. The election was a sham and the Iranian public knows it.
Ahmadinejad ran his election on a campaign of speaking out against the United Nations specifically and the United States in general. His opposition to the UN is the veto power of the five permanent members. Ahmadinejad was the only candidate to make such statements publicly. I am referring of course, to his '05 campaign. -
Ooops....
-
-
Yes sorry, I wasn't meaning an influence of open political pusuasion in my earlier post. I mean an underhand influence, maybe using Iranians on the CIA payroll. For example in the previous coup a ex CIA agent was given a million dollars by the US to go an begin an uprising and he did a very good job.
-
11:14PM ET -- A reader emailed a translation of the much-discussed report in the Kayhan newspaper (closely affiliated with Supreme Leader Khamenei) which is said to lay the groundwork for an arrest of Mousavi.
In laying out accusations of murder, assault, arson, destruction against Mousavi's supporters, the article begins (according to this translation):
Tens of dead and injured, widespread destruction of public property, widespread fires, and hundreds of citizens' cars destroyed are the results of two weeks of dodging the law and the selfishness of Mir Hossein Mousavi.
www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/13/iran-demonstrations-viole_n_215189.html
From what I heard this afternoon, he's already been arrested. -
Has anyone been watching the Daily Show on this? By coincidence, they had a real person over there when this stuff started to happen. I think they did a great job of humanizing the Iranians, and laughing with them at the same time.
I also enjoy Stewart's take on American voices who would make this all about America instead of Iran. I see on this board we have someone who even speaks about defending American values in reference to Iran. Strange. I get Obama's and others talking about the Iranians needing to respect human rights, human values, but I don't know what American values, however defined, have to do with it. Yeah, it's really all about us. Errrr, not.
Except when it comes time to deal with the arms issue, but that's pretty far away right now. A power struggle is underway in Iran, and it could be that both sides lose, and the security forces win, especially the Republican Guard. Hard to say. But interesting to watch.
I added a few relevant links to my blog last week:
— markstoneman.wordpress.com/2009/06/24/noteworthy-on-iran/
I need to add more, including these two:
— www.slate.com/id/2221033/ (repressing women and the stability of the regime)
— www.csmonitor.com/2009/0629/p09s02-coop.html (relating the current situation to 1979) -
One interesting consequence of Iran's demonizing Great Britain. Europe is considering pulling out all its diplomats: www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/world/middleeast/02iran.html
One problem the US has long had with Iran is that other major powers have pursued a different track. Maybe this will be an opportunity to bring US and European policy into alignment? That could help increase the value of American and European pressure. Of course, there is still Russia, and maybe China . . . Even if the diplomats aren't pulled, a transatlantic nearing of policy aims and strategies for attaining those aims might be coming.
By the way, the article points out that Europe is "Iran's biggest trading partner." That gives them leverage that we don't have. -
before we get to tell other countries how to stand up for freedom, we need to start doing it here!
www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/stand-up-for-freedom -
I believe there is no turning back in Iran. And I believe that will have profound positive effect on the region and the world. What we can do to help I don't know but again I believe our wholehearted support matters.
computzar.blogspot.com/2009/06/allah-akbar-death-to-dictator.html -
Fascinating development in Iran now. The NYT reports that "leading clerics" are defying the official line on the elections:
> The most important group of religious leaders in Iran
> called the disputed presidential election and the new
> government illegitimate on Saturday, an act of defiance
> against the country’s supreme leader and the most public
> sign of a major split in the country’s clerical establishment.
For more, see www.nytimes.com/2009/07/05/world/middleeast/05iran.html-
This is an interesting development. I hadn't seen that. Not unexpected though those leaders know change is coming, they also want to keep religious control so prefer to help it in to a new age instead of trying to prevent it and becoming inconsequential. Seems like they are planning ahead.
-
-
I'm hoping for a subtle but real shift towards more democracy and freedom. I'm afraid that too much of a shift will out the guns and, when measured by weapsons, the fight would be too one sided. -
It's hard to understand the news from Iran, but here's a very interesting piece on the BBC about Ahmadinejad's current battles with his own conservative allies: news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8171384.stm.
And here's a piece about the impending release of some 140 prisoners rounded up during the demonstrations: news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8173113.stm. It too reveals how murky the situation is. The one interesting fact here, according to the reporter in the "analysis" side bar, is that the Supreme Leader had to order the closing of some prisons. He should be above that kind of political and administrative daily business. Of course, he also should have kept himself above the fray in the election.-
what does he think he is, some kind of dictator?!
-
Clearly he's not one. And that's what makes the whole situation so hard to understand. We are used to thinking in dichotomies of dictatorship versus democracy, for example, but here we've got something else going on. Clearly it's not a democracy as we understand it, but it's a lot more complicated than the term "dictatorship" allows for.
Sounds like he'd like to be one, though, although he'd be beholden to that unsavory organization, the Revolutionary Guard. Or so it seems to me, though it is really hard to tell as just another citizen who has never studied this stuff. -
it is a theocratic republic... sorta like what certain people want to make here
-
Which people?
-
they know who they are
-
But what if I want to know who "they" are?
-
-
I have no clue whats happening there anymore
-
More on the show trials that have recently begun, of course right after the release I mentioned above: news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8180180.stm. The piece includes statements by Mousavi denouncing torture. The act of torture in Iran is likely no surprise to any of us, but it is interesting to hear it being denounced in Iran in statements against the current president there.
NY Times on the same thing: www.nytimes.com/2009/08/03/world/middleeast/03iran.html Of course, this story was submitted from outside Iran, this time Beirut, since foreign reporters are not allowed in to report from Iran.
The confessions at the show trials recall Arthur Koestler, Darkness at Noon, to my mind, not just for the methods used, but because they were used against fellow revolutionaries, fellow believers in the system, in this case an Islamic Republic instead of the USSR. -
The BBC continues to be helpful:
"Iranian Views: Divided Country"
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8183580.stm
"Who's who in Iran"
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8102406.stm -
Europe is none too happy about the the newest round of show trials: news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8191858.stm
I wonder if any of this is making an impression in Russia or China. Probably not. -
Now things really seem to be getting crazy.
"In Iran: A Call For Arrest Of Mousavi & Khatami"
www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/08/in_iran_a_call_for_arrest_of_m.html?ft...-
Since no one seems to be actually discussing these things, and since a further whole two or three sentences of thought occurred to me, I put them on my blog: markstoneman.wordpress.com/2009/08/09/turning-up-the-heat-in-iran/
Seriously, though, as confusing as Iran is, why the lack of interest? Is it because there is no way for the US to influence events there, so there is no way to make this a partisan battle about the correct US foreign policy posture at the moment? Or are fears like #deathpanel, #obamacare, #teaparty, #birthers, and #tcot sucking all the oxygen out of the place? (Those are hash tags you can search for on twitter to find some pretty nutty stuff, and some sarcastic commentary as well.)
Or is this more of a case of it's only interesting if it's on my television screen, and the government of Iran has pretty much made that impossible?
-
-
Still scratching my head about the outrage over a car-buying incentive program in this country and the possibility that we might get better health insurance coverage, or any at all, but what is going on in Iran raises little curiosity by comparison. Of course, the latest news might be a bit embarrassing, because it involves torture, and we don't have a clean record. Still, this is of a different order and against Iran's own citizens, and we are having a public debate about torture.
Interestingly, so is Iran, though public and free are not the same thing in their case. The latest on the BBC:
"Iran inmates 'tortured to death'"
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8200780.stm
"Probe urged into Iran jail 'rape'"
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8192660.stm
"Iranian prisoner abuse punished"
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8188534.stm
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
