13

How to help Iran

As the regime cracks down, the opposition is looking for support —but not interference


 

How to help IranBarack Obama began his presidency with a speech that implied a new relationship between the United States and Iran. “To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history,” he said during his inaugural address, and then added, “but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.”

Now Obama has his answer. Iran will not unclench its fist.

The past two weeks have seen massive street protests in Iran by hundreds of thousands of citizens who are not willing to accept the official results of a presidential election in which incumbent hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was declared the winner. The results were announced before all the votes could have been counted and were endorsed by Iran’s unelected supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, before the Interior Ministry released final numbers. They showed Ahmadinejad winning even in the regional and ethnic strongholds of his rival, reformist candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi. They are not plausible.

The Iranian regime first tried to ignore the protests. Ahmadinejad compared demonstrators to soccer hooligans, and Khamenei insisted the results were fair. But when protesters flooded the streets in numbers that have not been seen the 1979 Islamic Revolution, with the support of powerful political insiders such as former presidents Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and Mohammad Khatami, they could no longer be dismissed. Iran was at a crossroads. Its government could bend to the will of the people, order new elections, and try to preserve some vestige of legitimacy; or it could crush them.

Iran’s theocracy chose repression. It banned demonstrations and sent members of the paramilitary Islamic Basij militia to storm university dorms and throw students off balconies. Police and Basij charged through peaceful crowds on motorcycles and beat them with clubs. They shot to death or otherwise killed at least 17 demonstrators, though reports from Iranians on the ground suggest the true number of victims is higher. Wounded protesters arriving at hospitals were quickly treated and then sent elsewhere to recover, as the pro-regime Revolutionary Guards prowled hospital corridors, looking for patients with gunshot wounds.

Mousavi, once a loyal partisan of the founder of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, has exploded his image of a modest reformer by openly defying Khomeini’s successor, Khamenei. He has urged his supporters to continue their demonstrations and proclaimed himself ready for martyrdom. Khamenei, who warned Mousavi that he will be held responsible for “bloodshed, violence, and rioting,” could once pretend to be Iran’s spiritual leader, supposedly above the mundane grit of politics. No longer. Now his legitimacy is tied to Ahmadinejad’s grip on power. The divide in Iran is not only between the government and the people, but also within the political establishment itself.

The Revolutionary Guards have meanwhile vowed to “firmly confront in a revolutionary way rioters and those who violate the law.” So many of the protesters are young, but even those without memories of the events will know that the last time such revolutionary justice was dispensed, in 1988, thousands of political prisoners were hanged.

And yet neither side shows any sign of giving in. Demonstrations take place almost every day, and at night Iranians shout revolutionary slogans from their rooftops while Basij stalk the streets below trying to determine where the noise is coming from.

It is impossible to tell how this will end. It is almost certain, though, that Iran will never be the same again. There is no returning to the way things were before the election. Iran will move toward liberty or sink deeper into dictatorship. The shackles will tighten or they will be shaken loose. The question for Barack Obama, and for other world leaders, is what, if anything, they can do to influence which of these outcomes is more likely.

Barack Obama, unlike his predecessor, George W. Bush, never pushed the idea of regime change in Iran, and yet he is now witnessing the kind of pro-democracy revolt that neo-conservatives dreamed about for years.

His response so far has been restrained. On Tuesday, after facing mounting criticism, he did say he was “appalled and outraged” by the regime’s actions. But he hasn’t endorsed Mousavi or explicitly described the elections as fraudulent, explaining that he doesn’t want to give the Iranian government an excuse to blame the United States for the uprising. Instead, he has said that the United States stands with those Iranians who are seeking their “universal” rights to freedom of speech and assembly, and quoted Martin Luther King: “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”

Obama said King was correct, and he’s probably right. As Payam Akhavan, a professor of international law at McGill University, told Maclean’s last week, whatever happens in the short term, the ground beneath the Islamic Republic is crumbling. The millions who have taken to the streets in recent weeks are not going to forget their grievances, and governments that are not legitimate don’t last forever.

But some analysts believe there is more the United States can do. Dan Senor, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and a former foreign policy adviser in the George W. Bush administration, says the United States should endorse Mousavi. He acknowledges that Mousavi, a former prime minister, is hardly an obvious revolutionary, but like the former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, he has set off a chain of events he never envisioned and no longer really controls. “I believe he is a transitional figure,” Senor said in an interview with Maclean’s. “The movement he catalyzed is larger then him.”

Senor says the United States should try to contact Mousavi and other reformers (or their family members, should they be jailed) to acknowledge their struggle, express concern for their safety, and offer assistance. He says that Mousavi may decide that any contact with the United States would be harmful and refuse the call, but he argues that the attempt should still be made.

Senor sees a model for supporting the Iranian reformist movement in the 2004-2005 Orange Revolution in Ukraine, in which suspect election results were overturned by a mass pro-democracy uprising. Similar events took place in Georgia and Serbia. While American NGOs helped opposition parties and movements behind the scenes, the United States also applied more overt diplomatic pressure, linking future American engagement to the government’s legitimacy.

The success of these pro-democracy uprisings so worried Iran that in September 2007 Khamenei appointed Brig.-Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari as head of the Revolutionary Guards. Jafari was previously in charge of the Revolutionary Guards’ Strategic Studies Centre, and under his supervision the centre investigated these so-called “velvet revolutions” in places like Ukraine and Georgia with the goal of preventing something similar from happening in Iran. He took these lessons to his new post as leader of the Revolutionary Guards and established special brigades within the Basij to put down internal uprisings.

We have likely seen Jafari’s proteges among the baton-swingers in Tehran. The Iranian government has also accused outside powers of controlling the protesters, though there is no evidence this is true. For Senor, this is all the more reason for the United States to back the opposition—it will be blamed for the unrest in Iran regardless of what it does, so it might as well support an embattled democratic movement.

He cautions, however, that support is different than interference or instigation. “This reform movement is happening on its own,” he says. “We are not asking the Iranian people to stand up and risk their lives. They’re already doing that. This is not a movement that we are responsible for. The question is are we going to support them?”

For some analysts, the answer is no. “The idea that Washington tries to champion democracy protests wherever or whenever they happen, irrespective of the legacy or the history there, is relatively counterproductive,” says Suzanne Maloney, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. “This is not an American story. We are not an actor in this development in Iran. We can’t help it. And we can probably only hurt the cause of people we would wish to see advanced.”

Obama’s position is complicated by his proposal to meet directly with Iran’s leadership to discuss their nuclear program. Some of his critics, such as Senor, say Obama wishes to avoid antagonizing the Iranian regime so as not to jeopardize future negotiations once the current uprising is suppressed. This is the fear among some Iranian democrats as well. Arang Keshavarzian, an associate professor of Middle Eastern and Islamic studies at New York University, was in Iran for the election and during the demonstrations that followed. Two of his Iranian friends told him how appalling it would be to many Iranians if, five or six months from now, once all the fuss had died down, they were to turn on their televisions and see Obama sitting around a negotiating table with Ahmadinejad, as if the vote rigging and the shooting of protesters never happened.

Three years ago, Akbar Ganji, one of Iran’s most prominent democratic dissidents, wrote a “Letter to America” that was published in the Washington Post. He expressed his fear that the Iranian government would seek a deal with the United States in which it would make concessions about its nuclear program if America would turn a blind eye to Iran’s repression of its own people.

“In Iran, we hope to achieve our goal of a new polity and a new constitution not by violence but by following a peaceful and democratic path,” he wrote. “And in this struggle we need moral support from all freedom-loving people around the world—particularly the United States . . . We ask that in shaping its policies toward the Iranian regime, the United States not overlook the interests of Iranian civil society.”
The fact that so many of the signs held aloft by Farsi-speaking Iranians marching in Tehran today are written in English suggests that they, too, want the moral support of the United States and other “freedom-loving people” around the world. Keshavarzian, who took part in the post-election demonstrations, says there are efforts among Iranian democrats to forge links in other countries, but not necessarily with foreign governments.

“Iranians realize that these governments have limited resources and limited leverage with the Iranian government,” he said in an interview with Maclean’s. Instead, Iranian bus drivers, for example, will seek the support of their counterparts in Budapest, London, or Toronto. “The attempt is to get civil society relationships established with the outside world, to create solidarity with like-minded organizations.”

Maclean’s reached one of the Iranian protesters, Zahra, a 23-year-old university student, with the help of Arash Azizi, an Iranian journalist who has recently moved to Canada, and asked her what she and her fellow protesters wanted from the outside world, and especially from the United States. She said she hoped Obama wouldn’t recognize Ahmadinejad as Iran’s president, but didn’t want America to interfere in Iran. She detests the theocracy that runs her country, but wants Iranians to end it on their own.


 

How to help Iran

  1. Mousavi is a hardline regime insider who was vetted and cleared to run for office. And yet the regime felt so threatened by him that they resorted to massive election fraud to keep him out of office? THat's nonsense. There is no actual evidence of election fraud in Iran — see IranAffairs.com for the compiled list of claims and counter-claims.

  2. The election was a fraud. No doubt about that!

  3. The CIA has been in Iran for a long time, stirring the pot. The election was legitimate, despite the best attempts by our corporate-controlled western media to tell us otherwise. Check out the Counterpunch website for some actual election data.

  4. What, has the Macleans site been infiltrated by English-speaking(typing) Basij? Or did hass & JimD not bother to read the article?

    Regardless, thanks for the concise summary, and for keeping on top of this story.

  5. LOL!!! Only an obtuse moron of the highest order could seriously believe that Iran's election was legitimate. The Iranian government would have you believe that Ahmedenijad won 2/3 of the vote in Mousavi's home province. HELLLLOOOOO??? That would be like asking us to believe that John McCain won Chicago by a 2-to-1 margin last November! This was as blatant a rigging of an election as you will ever see.

    However, I do agree with JimD that the CIA is undoubtedly "stirring the pot" in Iran. I certainly hope so anyway. In addition to offering public support for the reformists in Iran, I sincerely hope that the CIA is also, behind the scenes, funneling money and guns across the border into Iran so that the reformists will have some firepower of their own to use against the Revolutionary Guard and Basiji thugs in the streets. The Revolutionary Guard has been sending money and arms into Iraq for years now that has been used to kill our troops. It's time to return the favor.

  6. I too doubt that the election is legitimate, but I have to agree with JimD that the CIA has been embedded and stirring the pot. I have also heard an interview with an Iranian university professor based in the US (? can't remember the name) that Ahmadinejad has very strong support in the rural and poor populace; that the western media did not balance their coverage by monitoring how the election results were taking place there; and that the deliberate emphasis of the west has been on the protest areas.

    This election was suspicious, I concur, but I also think the US has, and continues to manipulate a whole bunch of the political landscape and media to its own advantage.

  7. How to help Iranians?
    Do we bear some responsibility for election and re-election of Ahmadinejad? Yes we do!

    Paul Findley in his article “ Cool Clinton Response to Khatami Initiative Shows Israel-Inspired Dual Containment Policy Not Yet Dead”, Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, April 1998, Pages 32, 101:
    “If President Clinton does not quickly come up with a generous, cooperative response he will leave a sorely embarrassed Khatami hanging, twisting in the wind—an easy target for the radical religious leadership within Iran that opposes any rapprochement with the United States and seems to have control over most foreign policy questions. The hard-liners in the Iranian government will have a field day and may well be able to discredit the new president, despite the 70 percent vote he received.”

    Iranian Traditionalist (religious, very nationalistic, often poor, and under educated) voted for re-election of Ahmadinejad. In 1998 about 70% of the population voted for the progressive President Khatami. Why?

  8. Continued: How to Help Iranians?
    Our past political mistakes, and financial burdens we have placed on the Iranian people will not advance our long term American interests. The average family monthly income in Iran is less than $300. The Progressives are young, better educated and often the middle class segment of the Iranian population. Iranian college graduated young people have difficulty to find job. In spite of all attempts to create job, Iranian society has been handicapped by USA and many European nations' trade restrictions and had to incorporate a large fraction of their national income on self-defense. We have continuously placed Iran in a defensive posture hoping that we could force the nation into a self-destruction by massive unemployment and poverty.

  9. Continued: How to Help Iranians?
    How can we help?
    To assist the Progressive movement in Iran, allow a greater exchange between USA and Iran, remove the burdens placed on the Iranian people by economic sanctions and restrictions. It is foolish to punish the people for our disagreements with their government. By removing the burden, we allow change in demographics of Iran toward a larger middle class; thus, it will shift the internal Iranian policy from Traditionalists toward the Progressives.

    We will not advance our American interests, or the Progressive Iranian movement, by listening to those who advocate a more aggressive policy toward Iran.

    • wake up and smell the coffee! they have too much power as it is, you want to give them more. Do you realy belive that they'll let the mony get to pepole? you are dreaming mate!!

  10. How to help Canadians might the better question to ask? At least the Iranian people have the courage and resolve to not accept being controlled and manipulated. We openly accept being fleeced daily and having our right completely eradicated. The recent Civil Remedies Act approval and the Supreme Court allowing police to distribute information about people who have been acquitted in court, are only a few examples of why WE should be kicking some ass too. Personally, I think the only reason we're not, is because of our immigration policies. (I think they're policies) With 140 languages spoken and more than 50% of people in the major cities being new arrivals, uniting and inciting is nearly impossible. 1,000,000 people pulling in a 1,000,000 different directions. The bureaucrats have recognized this flaw and are now just reaming it to us with fraud after fraud, tax grabs, wire taps without warrants, trampling on our rights and anything else they feel like. The latest laughable effort is the federal government wanting to make the internet more efficient by "bundling". Oh…what a surprise, bundling allows them to read your email and easily monitor your internet use. Shocker !!!! Ask the person next to you if they've heard about the Civil Remedies Act. Nothing serious, just the removal of due process, or even charges, before they seize your property. Those annoying trials and the requirement of that creepy proof thing were getting in the way of a good old-fashioned fascist takeover ……. I have tremendous respect for the people of Iran and can only hope for the day that something happens here that allows us to restore the values that made Canada the country everyone wanted to come to in the first place. For now, we're just a culture of suckers !!

    • I find myself in full agreement with the above comment but am still left with the question "How to help Canadians?" The Iranians woke up from the narcosis of state induced political ennui, found their voice as a people and will soon, I believe, give political expression to themselves as a nation on that basis. How to wake Canadians from the slumber of our current neo-colonial regression within a party political system which is focussed on the malignant narcissism of its leaders rather than the rendering of any real service to its citizens is another matter. At what point did we lose those values that allowed Canada to be seen as an exemplary democracy. Start by rediscovering what those values were and then restate them in political terms . A good place to start would be " This government knows of no higher value than that of the individual before the law" -Prime Minister Trudeau.

  11. hi my name is ayreik from Iran in iran every one need Help police attack the peple
    the securety police cilent kill a god guys chera hamton saket shodin kassi nemikhad harfi bezzaane hamaton faght vasse poll kar mikonin baba ensaniyat inja dare LEH mishe

Sign in to comment.