Reza Molavi: The genie may not go back in the bottle
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
The official result of the Iranian election has left Iranians as well as Iran-watchers in the West baffled, disgusted and bewildered. Perhaps from the start, however, Mirhossein Mousavi was destined to fail. He hoped to combine the articulate energies of the liberal upper- and middle-classes with the business interests of the bazaar merchants. But his campaigns conducted via text messages and Facebook were irrelevant to the rural and working classes, those struggling to make ends meet, day in, day out. Although Mr Mousavi tried to appeal to them by addressing the problems of inflation and poverty, they were not convinced. And one should remember that Iranians living in the fringes of the major cities and in the villages, while not enjoying the same ability to talk to the international media, constitute a large proportion of the voting public.
Mr Ahmadinejad probably did win the election, but not by the inflated margin official results suggest. However, even taking these questionable statistics at face value, he cannot ignore the millions whose dismay has been recorded. Even in the official tallies, about 15 million people voted for someone else; the opposition estimates put it closer to 25 million, but no matter which number we go by, this is a huge number among the voting public who have expressed their displeasure with Mr Ahmadinejad and his backers.
Mr Mousavi's warning to the clergy-orientated governing elite that stealing the election would weaken the very foundation of the regime and ultimately bring about its collapse, carries weight. He is, and has been from the very beginning of the creation of the Islamic Republic, part of the political inner circle. And remember, Mr Mousavi and the other two candidates in the 2009 elections were permitted to run for the presidency only after they had been vetted and approved by the Guardian Council, which will usually carry out the Supreme Leader's wishes. The mass demonstrations yesterday clearly demonstrate that the "genie may not go back into the bottle", as Mr Ahmadinejad had predicted. It appears that the populace is no longer fearful of the police and other control apparatus. It is willing to risk all to be heard and yearns to put a legitimate system of government in place.
Mr Ahmadinejad – and those who support him – will have taken note of this utter displeasure and disgruntlement when calculating what to do next. The Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, may yesterday have ordered an investigation into the allegations of vote-rigging, but this is a man who at the weekend declared Ahmadinejad's re-election to be a "divine miracle". Any probe or recount into the voting anomalies will be a cosmetic affair, and will end with another declaration that the people expressed their will in record numbers through completely fair and free elections.
When this charade is over, people in Iran and the West will be well advised to move on. Given that the Iranian regime has been caught red-handed in this most precarious situation, there is a real opportunity to be seized. The US and Europe should not forget Iran's justified sensitivity to foreign meddling and the current regime's adept ability to justify its harsh repression by blaming foreign plots.
So the West should stop regurgitating the old line on lack of democracy and human rights, and focus on preparations for direct talks on the nuclear issue, on engagement and negotiations. No doubt Mr Ahmadinejad has been empowered, but the likelihood of Iran's other leaders supporting him to strike a deal with the US and the West on the nuclear issue should increase.
The Iranian leadership understands the dire straits it is in and fully appreciates it must start addressing the rampant inflation, unemployment and the acute need for direct foreign investment in the oil and gas industry. The chances are that the timing is right, for once, to get the current regime to respond honestly and transparently.
It is the contention of this writer that, once the gates have been flung open to foreign visitors and once investments and sanctions are lifted, the sheer volume of exchanges and the avalanche of contracts, compounded by the mismanagement of resources we are seeing Mr Ahmadinejad to be so capable of, will drive him and his cohorts from power.
Time is of the essence. The Western powers will do well, if they get over the shock of the elections and move on to the next chapter.
The writer is an Iranian national and director of the Centre for Iranian Studies at Durham University
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
And please stop talking about the "west" like it's a monolithic block of people and countries who all think and act the same way.
It was Bush the last President of the USA who was for pushing democracy for its own sake in the Middle East.
This leaves the Obama camp and their supporters on the wrong side of history. It also leaves the Iranian people without the still poweful USA as an ally.
The same is true of Jordan; just one proper election in Jordan and the world would have a majority palestinian country.
How bitterly ironic. In effect, the people who voted for Obama in the USA voted against democracy in the wider world.
Yes we could have; but no we didnt.
Israelis are such hypocrites!
Israelis are such hypocrites!
And so are you. "a REAL DEMOCRATIC arab nation" - no room for Jews then! And this discussion concerns the abuse of democratic principles by Iran (not Israel) - something you obviously can't bear to discuss!
Not by any common understanding of the term does the term 'Arab' include 'Jew'. You are confusing it with the term 'semitic' which does indeed cover the two groups. Of course, Jews can be of predominantly Arabic stock (Sephardi) as some can be predominantly European (Ashkenazi).
The racism, in so far as it is racism, belongs as much to the 'Palestinians' who reacted violently towards Jewish immigration - even when many were going to Israel after experiencing the hell of the Shoah. Had the reaction been different it is quite possible that the two could have lived side by side and the fct they coudn't is as much down to the Arabs as it was to the Jews.
I suppose you subscibe to the theory that the Arabs did not seek to crush Israel from the start despite your clear view that it was an illegal entity. And if they did try to do that what could be more natural that the Jews fought back and sought to forestall future attempts to destroy them?
"Zionists win the top prize for deceit and hypocrisy every time..by a mile.."
No, I think that the anti-Zionists do. Consider that here the issue of iran trampling on democracy is the topic that ought to be under consideration but anti-Zionists, of course, that all human rights abuses can be ignored or put on hold as long as Israel exists. If Muslims cannot treat their own people decently why should one expect them to treat others well? Your vision of Christians, Arabs and Jews living together peacefully in an Arab land lacks all credibility.
Just what exactly are you referring to?
But let me see. A president can't be criticised if he is black and his critic is Jewish?
That's your stance?
Seems pretty racist to me!
Rubbish. How do you think the Felashas got there in the first place? They were airlifted to Israel by those 'racist' Zionists. Of course there are racists in Israel as there are anywhere else. You yourself are engaging in a form of racism by representing all Zionists as racist without any attempt at qualification. Knowing half-truths can be as bad as lies!
I notice that you had no answer to my point that the Felashas were airlifted to Israel which rather undermines your calim that you continue to make that the statement made was 'par for the course'.
Just after sundown, cries of "death to the dictator" echoed through Tehran as thousands of backers for Ahmadinejad's rival, Mir Hossein Mousavi, heeded a call to bellow from the roofs and balconies. The deeply symbolic act recalled the shouts of "Allahu Akbar," or God is Great, to show opposition to the Western-backed monarchy before the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
Half of Labour members want Tony Blair back.
Obama: Iranian voters' voices should be heard
President Barack Obama said Monday he does not know who rightfully won the Iranian election, but that Iranians have a right to feel their ballots mattered.
With images of bloodied protesters in Tehran's streets recalling the Islamic revolution 30 years ago, Obama said an investigation into alleged vote-rigging should go ahead without additional violence.
"It would be wrong for me to be silent on what we've seen on the television the last few days," Obama told reporters at the White House.
"And what I would say to those people who put so much hope and energy and optimism into the political process, I would say to them that the world is watching and inspired by their participation, regardless of what the ultimate outcome of the election was," Obama said. "And they should know that the world is watching."
I thank you
Firozali A. Mulla
I thank you
Firozali A. Mulla
I thank you
Firozali A. Mulla
I am from south-asia, and election related culture is always bad here. When the mass are not educated and are ready to make concessions, then democracy really does not work. It create so much animosity and hatred. Really Iranians, you should wake up and see that is the West people do not go on destroying property and life for an election. Bush victory in 2000 did not create that chaos. It is because people there know nobody rules for ever. Even if you do not like Ahmadi, relax, he will be gone in few years. In the mean time you can work on improving your election system.
But all this disturbances will only weaken the position of Iran as a whole, do not forget the west/Israel is after removing the threat of a strong Iran, after they have broken up Iraq. Come on, get some peace and build on the democracy you have now, which many of your neighbors can only envy of. Because those countries are friends of the west, the west do not mind if they have a single dictator ruling for a decade or two.
The Iranian election was prepared, as a prime opportunity to break the confidence of its rulers and discredit them in the eyes of the world--with the help of the US and Israel.
It is the BIG LIE, which, given enough western backing, will cause a break up and confusion in Iran and if successful, bring into power a pro-US regime to divert it from its nuclear aspirations.
It is called pragmatism--The End Justifies the Means--and Zionists all over the world will be subscribe to its success.
Meanwhile, Britain is to have a SECRET inquiry into SOME of the aspects of going to war with Iraq--"democracy" rules KO!
Of what facts are you in possession that support your contention that there is a BIG LIE? What is the lie? That the election results have been fiddled? How do you know they haven't been? How do YOU know that the Iranian regime isn't lying? Millions of Iranians apparently think that it is capable of lying. Moussavi claims that he was told by officials that he had won only subsequently to be told that the result could not be allowed to stand because it would be tantamount to a defeat for the Iranian regime.
I don't know if that is true (in which case the BIG LIE is being perpetrated by the regime) but it appears credible to me. However, I won't pronounce upon anything with certainty without being in possession of the full facts.
03.16--03.24--03.25--03.29--03.51-------
But what we are seeing looks more and more reminiscent of the U.S. backed attempted coup to overthrow Hugo Chavez of Venezuela in 2002. What happened then was that in Caracas the opposition broght out huge numbers of its supporters to demonstrate for the overthrow of Chavez. Chavez supporters came out and there were gun battles. Fortunately, the outcome was that Chavez survived thanks to the loyaty of the army.
I don't know what the myriad of Zionist controlled Western news companies" you have been listening to but it seems to me that they have expressed a genuine confusion as to what has happened.
The real dishonesty comes from people like you who refuse to entertain the possibility that the regime has fiddled the results. Clearly huge numbers of Iranian people clearly think so and to argue that they are simply dupes of the "Zionist controlled Western media" is arrogance of the highest order. Just who are you to know what the actual true position is?
It is obvious to anyone that Mousavi represents the metropolitan elite and that's it, whereas president Ahmadinejad has the support of the average Iranian.
But what we are seeing looks more and more reminiscent of the U.S. backed attempted coup to overthrow Hugo Chavez of Venezuela in 2002. What happened then was that in Caracas the opposition broght out huge numbers of its supporters to demonstrate for the overthrow of Chavez. Chavez supporters came out and there were gun battles. Fortunately, the outcome was that Chavez survived thanks to the loyaty of the army.
Grow up. Go and live in Iran for a year or two if you can't stomach living in Britain.
How very convenient. So you can sound off about the evils of living on these rocks while enjoying the benefits of not having to live under a genuinely oppressive system? Of course if this country was so awful one would question why you 'prefer' to live here? If all people had the chance to vote with their feet is there any likelihood that more people would move from the UK to Iran rather than vice versa?
They used their Dirty Tricks team against Allende of Chile and lately against Chavez of Venezuala--to name but two of US intrigues of Central and South America.
The US with Israel led the vanguard to impose sanctions against Hamas, after it was democratically elected by a vast majority of all Palestinians in 2006--since then there has been chaos in Gaza and the West Bank, which obstructs challenges to Israel's validity.
The West will justify toppling Ahmadinejad, as a resolve to their nuclear question. QED
So you have been hearing voices? A sure sign of paranoia!
Don't expect me to place any value on your uncorroborated 'information'.
The forces that manipulate public feeling in situations such as this are now a matter of established documentary fact.
'Out of the frying pan, into the fire' - that's what happened in the last Iranian revolution.
[PS It doesn't appear possible to put comments under Robert Fisk's artcile on Iran today - the entry system is jammed].
Well, so they may be advised - but also to look unto themselves. It was not Mugabi who started the rot. It was the EU. The heartland, the exemplar, the very bastion of Western democracy. Vote for the EU constitution? Not a chance. If you voted against, we have another vote until you "get it right". If that doesn't work, then say it's not a "vote on the constitution" but a vote on a piffling little set of amendments to a treaty which has already been ratified. Never mind that the wording is identical, we don't need to vote on this one - just wait until the Irish change their minds and it's all done and dusted. It's all so encouraging.
It was heartwarming to hear Brown in the news this morning pontificating about the necessity of listening to the people. Perhaps Mr Ahmadinejad thinks he's the "right man for the job "? Oh, well, that's all right then, isn't it?
Antisemitism is defined as a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred towards
Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed towards Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, towards Jewish community institutions and religious facilities. In addition, such manifestations could also target the State of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. Antisemitism frequently targets Jews with conspiring to harm humanity and is often used to blame Jews for "why things go wrong".
Among contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:
- Making mendacious, dehumanizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such, or the power of Jews as collective - such as, especially, but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
- Accusing Jews as a people for being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
- Denying the genocide of Jews in Germany (the Holocaust/Shoah)
- Accusing Jews as a people, or Israel as astate, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust,
- Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal ti Israel than their own state.
Examples of how antisemitism manifests itself with regards to the State of Israel taking into account the overall context could include:
- Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, eg., by claiming that the existence of the State of Israel is a racist endeavour.
- Applying double standards by requiring of it a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
- Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (eg., claims of the Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterise Israel or Israelis.
- Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
- Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the State of Israel.
However, criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.
So there you have it. The opinions of several contributors to these blogs, including, but not limited to, britfree, guiseppone, robx53, ancientoneuk, goatbucket, findempire, copycat7, philipshahak, whihadist (and his holohoax), rhinocircus, achilles0200, clearly reach or breach the definition of antisemitism and the Independent happily publishes most of it. Whilst it is noticeable that, in recent weeks, britfree in particular, is bleating about censorship, the moderator is not being vigilant enough.
cronyblatcher clearly is too stupid to have read my posting and quotes Norman Finklestein.
Que sera sera.
That's only your definition because it meets a self-serving purpose.
Racism, in my book, is the a viewpoint that is based on the view that people of different races are inferior. If Zionists subscribe to that theory then, indeed, they are racists. If they don't, whatever you may think, then they are not.
If you adopt the line that you do then those who support those who attack Israel are 'racist' because their hatred is without qualification or distinction, is reserved for a class of people who are mostly defined by race (Jewish) and is bolsetered by hatred (particularly from those among their ranks who subscribe to white supremacist or Islamic fundamentalist views).
Personally, I think you are a racist - but that's just my point of view!
As I rather vigorously speak out for Israel I am at a loss to see why I am being accused of antisemitism. Otherwise I largely agree with you.
The deeply symbolic act recalled the shouts of "Allahu Akbar," or God is Great, to show opposition to the Western-backed monarchy before the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
They are not sick they are crazy with the asking for their votes back the ladies all who are supposed to be cooking food for the poor tired husbands , clergy men, tired from counting re-counting the coins in the donations boxes are tried from the nuke wars , words that too do not like who likes nuke? Do you? The girls hide the hijab in the purses then go to discos, Iran men hate all but they want to say we love the Shias. We do not like the Sunni; all mixed up like Scooby dobby doo in the dark night and the cave of the smoky lizard. IN USA in the meantime..The leadership of the increasingly embattled GOP minority in Congress continues to circle the wagons around the failed policies of the past.
So what do we have the present
"End the Occupation." CODEPINK co-founder Medea Benjamin and New York activist Zool Zulkowitz were physically dragged across the street from their original protest site next to the entrance gate to Bar Ilan University where audience members and press entered the university complex to attend the speech.
Several hours later, a French journalist and member of the CODEPINK delegation, was arrested as she crossed a small street in an attempt to take photos of the demonstration. As she was placed in an Israeli police car, several members of the delegation converged to determine why the journalist was being held.
They say you can't teach an old dog new tricks. It also appears that you can't teach a bunch of old-line conservatives about New Energy for America. The leadership of the increasingly embattled GOP minority in Congress continues to circle the wagons around the failed policies of the past. As the Waxman-Markey clean energy jobs plan moves toward a House floor vote as soon as 10 days from now, the House GOP leadership unveiled their "alternative."
I thank you
Firozali A. Mulla
When Austrian soldiers refused to shoot at their compatriotes the Zar obliged. Russions troops restored challenged Hapsburg rule. Defeated Germans fled for dear life across the Atlantic, The gold rush lured 1849 many to California. Evem more settled in other states.
The Great Crash of 1929 created conditions that made a majority of Gerrman voters consider Adolf Hitler's unsavory Nazi party a lesser evil than Marxists loyal to Lenin.
Peace treaties of Versailles and St. Germain prohibited unification of Austria and Germany. The former was torn by a civil war as rearmement violating Versailles stipulations provided jobless work and promised the upper class profit. Hardpressed my native country's Chancellor Dr. Kurt Schuschnigg announced a plebiscite on March 13. 1938. Had Hitler expected to attract enough votes, the Wehrmacht wouldn't have crossed the border on March 12. Hitler reset the referendum for April 10 to pronounce an incredible 99,7% vote in favor of unification. The major powers and peace treaty guarantors, notably England and France, didn't blink an eye. Mussolini even gave the green light,
3 weeks after the 7th birthday I threw up breakfast learning that my beloved uncle Willy was assasinated within hours of kissing me goodbye the day of a sham referendum more blatant and cruel than Ahmadinejad's.
Only Mexico lodged a formal protest against Nazi invasion of Hitler's native Austria.
However he and Aunt Ria didn't mind to relax with their only daughter, mom's godchild at our beautiful summer home in suburban Salmannsdorf until the referendum calmed tension. To make a long, sad story short I refer to Daniela Angetter's Zehner Biography: Gott schuetze Oesterreich and Youtube distribution of a recent ORF production. Neither is available in English as far as I know.
Pray that Mr. Mousavi is spared Uncle Willy's fate. Remember Sowjet tanks cruelly crushing student revolting 1957 in Budapest. Pray for young Iranians revolting against supression and forgive Kibitzers egging them into risky no-win confrontation. Mind Mr. Molavi's bottom line: Time is of the essence. The western powers will do well, if they get over yhe shock of the elections and move on.
20/20 hindsight criticizes Al Gore for not fighting suspect elections in Florida in Court. He wisely weighted damage this could do to his country and the rest of the world. There was no way to predict that VP Cheney, Rummy et al could persuade President George W. Bush to initiate preventive war based on phnony evidence. Belated award of half a booby price impairs credibility of Alfred Nobel's generous bequest. but gave growing environmental concer the boost it needed.
With due respect to Voltaire groomed in the worst of all possible worlds Obama tries his best to improve it. President Ahmadinejad defied mass protests by visiting Russia for a summit, appeared with President Dmitry Medvedev on TV joking and smiling.
Cuios regio, eius religio, dating back to the peace of Augsburg 1555, motivated my ancestors to flee to Catholic Austria rather than challengea Lutheran ruler. Is there a better solution for faith-based conflict?