Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion
Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute
AKI is reporting that Iran's national guard, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, with help from the popular militia, Basij, just broke up a demonstration by hundreds of Mousavi supporters in downtown Tehran. They used tear gas and beatings, characterizing the peaceful assembly as "sabotage." The small crowd was successfully dispersed.
End/ (Not Continued)
posted by Juan Cole @ 6/22/2009 12:46:00 PM
|Tip Jar for IC
|Cole @ Macmillan Speakers|
|Global Affairs Blog|
 Facebook |
| |  |
|---|
| | |  |
|---|
Muslim Denunciations of al-Qaeda and Terrorism
Suggested Books about the Middle East
Michigan War Studies Review. Many excellent resources.
Individual items can be linked to through the permalink in the time of posting at the end.
Write your political representatives via Congress.org.
ARCHIVES
The feed address is http://www.juancole.com/ rss.xml
Awards
Winner, October 5, 2007, Scott Nearing Award for Courageous Scholarship (Awarded by the Graduate Students of the Political Science Department, University of Pennsylvania).
Winner, 2005 James Aronson Award for Social Justice Journalism, Hunter College.
Winner, 2004 Koufax Award for Best Expert Blog
Winner, 2004 Koufax Award for Best
Posting
9 Comments:
Why do you call an *unlawful* riot a "peaceful assembly".
I see where Google Translate now includes Farsi ("Persian"). Wonder if Sinclair Lewis' famous 1921 prediction, "When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross" will translate at all well.
Bhadrakumar and Escobar at Asia Times are already proclaiming the fizzling of Iran's "color" revolution. Despite their usual perceptiveness, I think the 'color' label is far too narrow and their conclusion is too quick. Naked repression once begun on one's own people is a long term contract, and is hardly less objectionable to a proud people than foreign occupation. Khamenei has strong apparent force at the moment, but those forces must remain paid and safe within a larger population's own back yard. There are many more ways to non-lethally debilitate such a force beyond public protests, in which protestors are extremely vulnerable.
As the situation in Tehran enters a lull, the happenings in the shrine city of Qom takes center stage.
Hashemi Rafsanjani's weeklong quest to oust Khamenei via group fatwa (action by the Assembly of Experts is more a legal formality) is coming to a head. Numerous reports indicate that Rafsanjani has obtained a critical mass of Marja support (including super-heavyweight al-Sistani of Najaf) and the only sticking point is deciding what or whom would replace Khamenei in the ruling system.
The quietests (led by Ayas. Montezari and Sistani) are probably favoring the Committee/Council model that al-Arabiya reported about, which would dilute the political power of any single Marja, while hardline Ayatullahs like Mesbeh-Yazdi might seek the office of Rahbar for themselves.
These theological differences go back to the hot rivalry between Ruhullah Khomeini and Abdul Qasim al-Khoei (Sistani's mentor) from the 1970's and 80's over the legitimacy of veliyat-e-fiqh (Rule of the Jurist).
Another wildcard is exactly what role Rafsanjani sees for himself in Islamic Republic 2.0. The conventional wisdom was that Hashemi saw himself as the next Rahbar, but he likely had to compromise on that to get Sistani and Monetzari's support.
Whatever the outcome, the clerics have likely had enough of Ahmedinejad and will seek his resignation and a re-vote. The stage for this was set by the Guardian Council, who have admitted major irregularities in the June 12 vote.
Everybody in the corridors of power in Tehran (and Baghdad and Najaf) have their eyes on Qom. Hopefully Washington will follow suit.
What effect is this likely to have on future protests? That is, will the Revolutionary Guard successfully breaking up one protest have a chilling effect on or inhibit the formation of the next protest?
http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2009/06/mujahidin.html
June 22, 2009
Mujahidin
I am aware that there are good people among the demonstrators and that there are people who don't like Moussavi. But it is important to dissociate any struggle against the Iranian regime from the lousy Moussavi who--like the regime of Ahmadinajad--has blood on his hands--more blood indeed. I also notice that the Shah stooges are jumping in the frey among the Iranians in exile and the largest rally in support of the Iranian protest movement in Paris was sponsored by none other than the pro-Saddam Mujahdin Khalq which sent car bombs into Iran. I am looking for an independent leftist movement that does not chant Islamist slogans (like Moussavi) to support, while identifying with the innocent victims who have been killed. Somebody wrote to me complaining that I don't need to invoke Palestine. Let me explain: I will invoke Palestine at every corner, and every second. If I can, I would skip sleep to invoke Palestine. Not only for the obvious reasons, but also because it is symbolic of the hypocrisy and falsehoods of Western governments and media. If somebody has a problem with my Palestinian refrains, tough...potato. And notice that Western media which usually expresses horror at any act of suicidal bombing, reacted with a measure of admiration at the act of suicidal bombing against Khomeini shrine. I would really be happy if demonstrations break out against every single regime in the Middle East, and all of them are overthrown. However, I understand that the US and Europe would really panic if the likes of Mubarak or House of Saud or Hashemite King PlayStation are threatened, let alone overthrown.
-- As'ad AbuKhalil
IS THIS THE BEGINNING OF THE END OF THEOCRACY'S STRANGLEHOLD ON IRAN?
The initial movement to dispute the results of Iran's Presidential elections has now morphed into a struggle for freedom and a rebellion against theocracy's 30 year stranglehold.
The unelected Guardian Council headed by the Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was imposed upon Iran following the revolution of late Ayatollah Khomeini. This body of clerics and jurists has bestowed upon itself the ultimate power to veto any laws passed by the elected Majlis - the Iranian parliament. The Council also has the bestowed upon itself the power to stop any candidate from taking part in elections. This structure has nothing to do with Islam and is a draconian powerhouse created by Iranian theocracy to keep a stranglehold on Iran's body politic.
The cracks that appeared immediately after the Presidential election are not so much because Iranians want Mousavi to be their President, but because they are sick and tired of the draconian rule by the mullahs for the last thirty years.
Prior to the Islamic revolution, Iranians suffered under the brutal and self serving regime of Shah of Iran and his vicious secret service - Savak. The 1979 revolution was not so much pro Khomeini but an anti Shah uprising. However, the people did not bargain for a theocratic led stranglehold on their daily lives. The frustration spilling out on Iranian street today is because of restriction on personal liberties and imposition of harsh rules on daily lives of Iranians especially on women.
For the first time clergy's power and the Guardian Council's stranglehold has been seriously challenged. The question is, where do things go from here? Continued confrontation will lead to more bloodshed. The chances are that clergy and Ahmadinajed will win this round and keep their hold on power, but for how long that is the question? This may not be the end but the beginning of the end for the clergy.
Also, at this time there is no apparent alternative to the system in place. The mullahs were clever enough to have enshrined their powers in the constitution which they wrote and had Majlis approve it.
Will the Iranian Military take over and throw out the clergy and the constitution with it? That may get rid of the mullahs, but will not be a good thing in itself. Both Ahmadinajed and Khamenei have support in rural areas and in the mosque and that could lead to a major unrest and possibly a civil war in Iran and that is no one's interest.
It has to be seen how all this plays out. Beyond moral support and electronic enabling, the Iranian people must be left alone to fight their battle for freedom and democracy. Any hint of behind the scenes involvement of CIA, MI6 or any other western intelligence agency will severely damage the cause of the people. The Iranian Government will use that as an excuse to label protesters as American/Western backed and crack down on them even more severely. So however tempting it may be, my suggestion to CIA and MI6 is to back off
Juan, do you have any comments on George Friedman's take on the Iranian election. Friedman is the founder of Stratfor and pretty much agrees with some (not all) of what I've taken you to task on recently. I'll be glad when we can move on to more of your usual excellent reporting although this is still an excellent issue for more discussion.
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20090622_iranian_election_and_revolution_test
(Thanks, Buck, for the link.)
Juan, your analysis doesn't address the social reality of Iran.
Further, it confuses the fact that Ahmadinejad is the main threat to established clerical class (and cohorts) who have found a luxurious perch as a consequence of revolution, but are averse to the (mainly external) side effects of adopting a revolutionary position in today's world.
From my (clearly limited) view here in the West as an expat Iranian (79) and technologist (software and internet), I also see evidence for a concerted effort on the part of external 3rd parties (state actors, such as BBC, intelligence services, etc.). Given that most of this effort is focused on the Western audiences and the court of world opinion, it is only appropriate for me to point out to you that your analytical position is clearly subservient to the line of thought that terminates in a military confrontation with Iran. (Not a pleasant company for you to find yourself in, historically and morally speaking.)
Post a Comment
<< Home