RSS

Demonstrations have been staged by Iranians around the world - with banners asking "Where are our votes?" News websites including BBC and CNN as well as social networks such as Facebook have been blocked in Iran following the violent protest demonstrations in the streets of Tehran for depicting the public anger against the fabricated election results of the Islamic Republic.

Text messaging and other means of communication are all blocked. It was terrible to see the horrific photos from Tehran showing the police beating young protesters drenched in blood, many of whom had voted for the first time in a hope for "change." Many of whom now say, "our votes have been disregarded, we will never cast a vote again!"

Former reformist candidates have demanded that the Guardian Council - an unelected body that supervises elections - dismiss the fabricated results of the election and regain public trust with a new ballot. Mir Hussein Moussavi, the main rival of incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, requested his supporters continue non-violent protest demonstrations against the results. The second strongest rival, Mr. Mehdi Karrobi, has said that he does not recognize Ahmedinejad as President. Meanwhile, supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei has ordered an investigation into the election results.

According to official results, Ahmedinejad won with 62.63 percent of the vote. Mir Hussein Moussavi secured 33.75 percent. Polling hours were extended till late at night due to huge voter turnout. Immediately after the polls were closed, an official Iranian news agency declared Ahmedinejad the winner. This raises questions as to how the results could be announced so quickly. How did they count all the ballots, from far-flung rural parts of the country that take an entire day to be counted? Based on these facts, the supporters of Ahmedinejad's rivals accuse the government of fraud in the election results. They say as many as 17 million votes are missing. Some of Mr. Moussavi's campaigners claim that the results of many ballots were announced even without boxes being opened after the polls were closed.

Seeing the keen interest of large parts of Iran's youth in the 10th presidential elections, foreign media predicted a change of administration in Tehran. For the first time, Iranians were participating in large numbers with enthusiasm, but the predictions went wrong when the fabricated results were announced. It seems very likely that the investigation will result in favor of Ahmedinejad, riots will continue for some days or weeks, and then everything will calm down.

The will of Iranians has been broken long before the "elections." It was broken when Ahmadinejad became the favorite of the decision maker, the unelected supreme leader Mr Khamenei.

Whoever the president may be, the Supreme Leader remains the final decision maker in Iran. Khamenei's support for Ahmedinejad was evident long ago, but Iranians didn't expect him to ignore their will so blatantly.

Soon after Ahmedinejad's victory was announced on the election night, Khamenei greeted the "re-election" by asking people to accept the results. According to election regulations, Khamenei had to wait for three days to hear any complaints arising before approving the final results, but he rushed to declare Ahmedinejad's victory immediately.   

Iranians know very well that these fraudulent elections were blessed by the Supreme Leader. Although the theocratic regime has attempted to legitimize its rule by holding fake parliamentary and presidential elections, the real power always remains with the unelected Supreme Leader.

Khamenei supported Ahmedinejad's confrontational approach to the leadership of Iran. Reformists had promised to change it, but Khamenei did not want this.

Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, the regime has tried to legitimize the dictatorial system with so-called democratic drama, but the most recent elections showed Iranians that they would never be able to bring change within the theocratic dictatorship. They need a revolution to overthrow the entire political set up and clerical regime.

The cautious international reaction to the Iranian election is surprising. In his Cairo speech Barack Obama claimed that America would not impose any system of government on any country, but would support democracy with the same spirit.

The US, the European Union and other international powers should react to the call of thousands protesting in Tehran. Pressure should be placed on Iran. The nation should be further isolated with more sanctions in order to compel it to accept the demand of the masses for democratic values.

Abbas Daiyar is an editorial writer and columnist currently affiliated with the Daily Outlook Afghanistan.

Related Materials from the Atlantic Community:

• Editorial Team: How to Respond to the Iranian Elections? 
• Editorial Team: Is Apologizing a Sign of Weakness or Strength?
• Sepideh Parsa: "Weblogistan" Key to Democratization in Iran
  

June 16, 2009

Reader

• 5
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

So you're calling on the Western countries to interfere in Iran's internal matters? There is already considerable distrust between the Islamic world and the West already. Let's count it: Kashmir, Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo, Somalia, Sudan, Cyprus, Lebanon, Chechnya -- Jihadists have grievances and/or misgivings in all of these regions for Western policies or interventions. And now you're asking the same grievance to extend to Iran? Remember that Sistani and Nasrallah, Bin Laden and the elk are all waiting to pounce at any move gone wrong.

Look, Moussavi himself is a pawn of the clerical system. He's as much part of the establishment as is Ahmadinejad. Mousavi and Karrobi were APPROVED by the Guardian Council to run, while Jews, Christians and others were NOT allowed to run. Moussavi was the former prime minister who oversaw acts of state terrorism on civilians; Karrobi himself is a cleric. Any 'revolution' that comes under their leadership is merely a political ploy.

June 17, 2009

Colette Grace Mazzucelli, Hofstra University / New York University, Platinum Contributor (333)

• 5
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Mr. Daiyar,

Thank you for your comments. Respectfully, I suggest the following. The Iranians who are demonstrating for reform have the opportunity to show their will to republican government by sustaining peaceful protests throughout their country.

The longer the protests can endure, the more of a chance for change to occur. Those in power will be forced to acknowledge that the masses will not tolerate the existing situation.

Through the use of cell phone communications throughout the country, Iranians can and are mobilizing themselves. If a general strike can be organized with enough of a critical mass, with no one center, but multiple sites in different cities where the mobilization is self-sustaining, a popular movement can lead to a paralysis in the entire country.

Witness what happened in Serbia to bring Milosevic down. The Western countries stayed out of that mass movement. It was necessary for young Serbians to take the responsibility for their country's fate.

Those young persons demonstrated that it was possible to remove a brutal dictator. The way in which this was accomplished showed the outside world that Serbia could struggle to evolve in a democratic way over time.

The election figures tell a contested story from inside the Islamic Republic:

Total Eligible Voters: 49,322,412 with results as follows:

Moussavi: 19,075,623; Karrobi: 13,387,104;

Ahmadinejad: 5, 698,417; Rezaii: 3,754,218.

No half-measures will satisfy the reform-minded Iranians. Their future is in their own hands. Interference from the outside will only play into the plans of hardliners who seek any excuse to implement a brutal repression.

President Obama's actions and tone are right on the mark in this situation. The United States and the European countries continue to monitor events closely. Their intent to keep a dialogue open with Iran is essential. The next days and weeks will tell if the Iranian people can sustain the momentum to reform, which can lead to genuine change.

Sincerely, Colette Mazzucelli

Tags: | Iran |

June 17, 2009

Xyz

• 3
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Mr.Daiyar,
nice concerns shown to this regard. I am also personally against the Iranian regime,
but i believe that the interference of the EU and The US will increase tension in the region. Thus it would be better that they should let the Iranians solve their problems on their own, and
no chance should be given to the US to use the situation against Iran. The interference of US will more damaging for Iran. And i also should let you know that both the candidates are against the US in fact Mr.Musavi's strategies are more aggressive than that of of Mr.Nejad. All those against Iran thinks that the protests are for bringing change in Iran, which is never right in fact the protesters are all in favor of the more extremist regime. Above all i believe that peace in Iran means peace in the region. And tension in any part of the region is not in favor of any other nation. Thus it is not a state of being happy for the situation in Iran.

June 17, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

• 3
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

One thing I think is clear about the Iranian revolution is that - it's not about us, and it would be utterly unproductive to try to make it about us.

We can look on with a friendly attitude, perhaps make materials and tools availlable, provide safe sanctuary for leaders (as France did for Ayatollah Khomeni). By tools I mean mainstream social networking tools, open source software, etc. Anything specifically provided by western intelligence agencies or governments would likely backfire. Similarly we shouldn't ignore the protestors, we should support democratic values. But we cannot free them We can keep the pressure on somewhat, keep reminding the world that the government has been behaving as a repressive tyranny, etc. But we cannot free the Iranian people - they must free themselves. Above all they must define what freedom means for them.

June 17, 2009

David Neil Lebhar, Atlantic Community, Gold Contributor (134)

• 4
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Interesting article from the New York Times on exactly what Donald is talking about - communication tools in Iran and how the US government intervened (a little) to keep them working to help the protestors.

"US Steps Gingerly Into Tumult in iran"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/world/middleeast/17media.html?hp

June 17, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

• 0
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Thanks, David, good link.

I think that it is probable the demostrators are correct and the election was stolen, but also possible that Ahmadinejad may have won, or that it was close.

The way the government went about handling the election struck me as highly suspicious, unfortunately. I saw little mention of local totals being broadcast as the counting went on - just the 'final' total announced by the Justice Minister. If Bush had ever tried that out the streets of the US would have exploded - and rightly so. Transparency is incredibly important to free elections, and lack of transparency raises strong suspicions of dirty deeds.

Iran conducted those 'elections' without oversite either domestic or foreign, and the results are (I fear) completely compromised. Even if they reported the true count the way they conducted the election means those results cannot be believed.

June 17, 2009

Marek Swierczynski, journalist at TVN24, Diamond Contributor (1102)

• 3
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

@ Don and others,
Let me quote you Donald for the start: "Iran conducted those 'elections' without oversite either domestic or foreign, and the results are (I fear) completely compromised. Even if they reported the true count the way they conducted the election means those results cannot be believed. "
Well, so what? Is there any obligation to hold free and just elections in a country that is effectively a theocracy? Is there anything in the international law that imposes any kind of sanctions on a country that doesn't? Isn't it up to the people of this country to decide what kind of government they obey?
I am afraid that the Iranians will have to make up their minds themselves first and act before any kind of outside "help" may be offered. In the era of free (?) internet communication it is so much easier than when Eastern Europe was trying to get free from the communist rule or when the Chinese students tried to keep the country's reform course after Hu Yao Bang's death.

June 17, 2009

Abserver

• 1
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Much has been made of the popular protests against Ahmadinejad's election. A closer look will reveal that the 'pro-reform' protesters are essentially upper-class urbanites and relatively young, protesting mainly in Tehran. These are also the people with greatest access to the internet -- and Twitter. I think the protesters are not representative of the will of the general population in the way portrayed and understood here. After all, who is Husain Musavi? He's the former editor-in-chief of the establishment's "Islamic Republic" newspaper and a member of several establishment councils. If there's anyone who doesn' represent a break with the establishment, it's Musavi.

June 17, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

• 2
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

"Is there any obligation to hold free and just elections in a country that is effectively a theocracy?"

It's called the 'Islamic Republic', not the 'Theocracy of Iran'. I think they have an obligation to their people, not to onlookers like you and I. Let's not forget that the 'theocracy' started as something of a religious meritocracy. Ayatollahs and Grand Ayatollahs are supposed to be the creme de la creme of Iranian Shia theologians. Khomenei certainly was, but Khameni was chosen for for his political opinions, not his scholarship. Grand Ayahtolah Montezeri (Khomeni's original successor) was a great scholar, but spoke up against the way he saw the system was developing, so he's been under house arrest and excluded from the government.

It was never a proper democracy, although it had the seeds of one. It did start out as a meritocracy, but effectively has been overthrown by an internal coup. Now the remaining vestiges of the post-Revolution order are under existential threat. The office may not have much power, but fairly honest elections were held for a time at least to elect the figurehead. Yes he's a symbol; but symbols are important!

We may be seeing a second coup in train - seems to me that the 'Revolutionary Guard' is seizing the reigns within the past few days.

Friend Abserver, I think you miss the point. Iran is a country with a dominant capital city; in such countries revolutions begin in the centre. Think of France as a simile. Revolutions in France begin in Paris. Always. And they are fomented by the discontented middle classes, the educated ones. Yes, the called themselves the 'sans-culottes (without trousers), but that was romanticism. It is the professional classes and the tradesmen who lead and man successful revolutions in such places, and the 1979 revolt against the Shah was an perfect example of such a revolution. And now, for the first time since the Shah and subsequent instability - we are seeing it again.

But it may not be 1979 over again. The seeds of the Shah's downfall were sown during the 60's, when Khomeni defied the Shah and had to flee to France to avoid being murdered by the secret police. What we may be seeing is the beginning of the downfall fo the Islamic Republic, not the end. If the Revolutionary Guard are taking power, then what may fall out is something more similar to the Colonel's Putsch in Greece during the 60's. But such systems do not long endure without very wide support, and tend to alienate their supporters over time.

June 17, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

• 2
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

This was interesting BHL on Iran: http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=3bc29baf-d487-4799-90db-a...

To me the issue is not whether Husain Musavi is any kind of a liberal. His liberalism seems to be very limited, perhaps imperceptable. With a short list of candidtes approved by Khamei it could not be otherwise, and the 'liberalism' merely symbolic and cosmetic.

No, the point is the people's right to choose. The election promises the right to choose among a short list. but even that was taken away after the fact. An empty symbol, but symbols are important and at times crucial.

This may be one of those times. There may be the seeds of a far more powerful change in the air, and such changes can be set off by very little. The meeting of the Estates-General led to the French Revolution. Almost everyone in the Estates-General was a conservative or at best a moderate by later standards, but le Roi Francaise had infringed their rights for years, even the rights of the clergy andf the aristos, much less the Third Estate. Attempts to disband the Estate-General when it went too far lit the tinder for a far greater change than anyone intended.

It may happen here, but perhaps later than sooner.

June 18, 2009

Colette Grace Mazzucelli, Hofstra University / New York University, Platinum Contributor (333)

• 2
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Dear Fellow Contributors:

The link to this article in the New York Times, "Stark Images, Uploaded to the World," http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/world/middleeast/18press.html?_r=...
includes a quote from Christiane Amanpour, CNN’s chief international correspondent and a native of Iran, who "expects a heavier emphasis on amateur video" in news reporting. As she explains: “You can’t keep any of this news down anymore, and that’s a huge change from the past,” ... “The process of getting the word out is totally democratized.”

I believe that this is a very important aspect of the reform movement, which places the responsibility squarely on the Iranians for the future of their country. I do not believe that any kind of intervention in the classical sense of the term would be prudent or constructive.

Asking Twitter to delay its maintenance operations must be viewed, I believe, in the context of much broader efforts using all kinds of new technologies, not just the Internet, by Iranians throughout the country to remain in touch to organize these mass protests.

The history of Iran is one in which distrust of foreigners and their manipulations is strong. The overthrow of the Shah was, as we know, a long time coming given the perception of him as a weak leader in the pocket of the United States, even if by the 1970s, Nixon and Kissinger did not have as much leverage with Iran their predecessors did in the 1950s and 1960s.

What is unfolding in Iran is potentially revolutionary because of the challenge this kind of mass-organized reform movement poses to a state apparatus, which under Ahmadinejad's Presidency has relied increasingly on the military (Revolutionary Guards and, more importantly, the Baseej), to suppress the republican elements of the regime.

If "getting the word out is totally democractized," then potentially there is no 'segmentation of demand,' meaning competing ideas can be exchanged across many different segments of the population and the filters the government creates to distort ideas, and to sustain myths, are less and less effective.

This evolution is a possible sea-change with profound implications in the long-term for a regime whose Supreme Leader has consistently relied on the competition among rival elites in government and the acceptance of his word by a significant part of the the Iranian population, which has, until present, not contested his authority.

I do not think that the events we are witnessing in Iran presently can be compared to other revolutions or cultural contexts. This movement, particularly the way it is being created on a daily basis and the way it is being sustained right now, is unique with the potential to make us rethink the ways we have considered the 'right to intervene' and the responsibility individual states have to protect their own populations. If the state fails to recognize its responsibility in this vital area, the populace must act to preserve its own right to life.

Sincere regards and greetings from New York, Colette

Tags: | Iran |

June 18, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

• 2
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

There is also a piece about the cyber-war behind the demonstrations, by NYTimes columnist Nick Kristof :

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/opinion/18kristof.html?ref=opinion

The demonstrators are using a web gateway named FreeGate, which is the creation of Chinese Falun Gong supporters. They have been fighting a war of their own, it seems, trying to overcome eforts by the Chinese government to build a cyberwall around China. Their network is being severely strained by the traffic from Iran.

"One result was a free software called Freegate, small enough to carry on a flash drive. It takes a surfer to an overseas server that changes I.P. addresses every second or so, too quickly for a government to block it, and then from there to a banned site. Freegate amounts to a dissident’s cyberkit."

Kristof: "Human-rights activists from Cuba, North Korea, Syria and elsewhere have appealed to Congress to approve the $50 million Internet freedom initiative, and Tom Malinowski of Human Rights Watch says he supports it as well."

"China is fighting back against the “hacktivists.” The government has announced that new computers sold beginning next month will have to have Internet filtering software, called Green Dam (the consortium has already developed software called Green Tsunami to neutralize it). More alarming, in 2006 a consortium engineer living outside Atlanta was attacked in his home, beaten up and his computers stolen. The engineers behind Freegate are now careful not to disclose their physical locations."

Hmmm, that last is very ominous. Hard to seey why anyone other than Chinese officialdom and/or beneficiaries of the regime wanting to do that, isn't it? Might have been a *private* effort, not *official*.

$50 million is pocket change by the standards of western governments, of course. It could even be raised by private efforts. Seems to me that the real problem is providing IT support for sudden surges in demand for this kind of thing. I'd advocate using something called 'cloud computing', which are servers out on the internet which provide quickly scaleable server power for web sites. The problem with provate services of this kind is that they are maintained by companies like Google and Amazon, who can and have been pressured by governments into becoming instruments of oppression. Specifically China.

So a non-profit cloud infrastructure not susceptible to this kind of pressure is a good idea, I think, and the US should certainly do it's share to finance it. Not sure it should be the government which finances it, a group like Human Rights Watch privately funded would have a lot of advantages as the network provider, although it would need money and talent.

June 19, 2009

Colette Grace Mazzucelli, Hofstra University / New York University, Platinum Contributor (333)

• 0
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Dear Colleagues,

It will be interesting to see if clerics receive a permit to stage an unprecendented rally Saturday.

According to one report, a top Reformist body, made up of influential clerics, asked for authorization to hold a pro-Mousavi rally on Saturday in Tehran.

The Association of Combatant Clerics (Majma'-e Rowhaniyun-e Mobarez) made the request via a letter to Tehran's governor's office, as reported on the Kalameh website Thursday.

If held, the rally is scheduled for Saturday from 4 to 7 pm (1230 to 1530 GMT) from Enqelab (Revolution) Square to Azadi (Freedom) Square to protest the results of the country's recent presidential elections.

The website states that Mir-Hossein Mousavi will address protesters. Former reformist president Mohammad Khatami and the members of the Association of Combatant Clerics (ACC) will reportedly participate in the rally as well.

The Supreme Leader is supposed to give an address Friday, which is likely to provide a sense of how events could unfold in the days ahead. Potential options -

1) the election is declared null and void with a new election on the horizon;

2) the regime asks for more time to sort out its response to present events;

3) the protests continue to grow throughout the country while remaining peaceful in the tradition of non-violent resistance, as Gandhi practiced in India before independence, and the government cracks down in a brutal manner.

Sincere regards and greetings from Washington, DC, Colette

Tags: | Iran |

June 22, 2009

Colette Grace Mazzucelli, Hofstra University / New York University, Platinum Contributor (333)

• 3
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Dear Atlantic-Community.org Colleagues,

Since the 1979 Revolution, different governments have left their mark on the revolutionary Islamic Republic’s regime. Under Ahmadinejad, observers are witness to the progressive and systematic undermining of republican government. International reports confirm that institutions, which, in a republic, should be responsible to break up government information monopolies, are under state control. Professional journalists inside the country are the victims of brutal repression. Public forums online, which normally allow a variety of ideas to challenge erroneous argumentation, are subject to deliberate interruption. Attempts by the Ahmadinejad government to use the landslide results to propagate the myth of legitimacy have failed in the eyes of millions. Of greater significance is that the Supreme Leader is now open to criticism from within the segment of the population led by the protesters.

At present, only that segment of the Iranian people on the streets openly supports reforms. Their protests have opened fissures within the clerical elite. Influential clerics, like Mousavi, Rafsanjani, and Khatami, acquired their influence, prestige, and wealth through the elite-dominated establishment. Theirs is not yet a call for regime change. Journalists outside Iran are watching the streets to gage if the crowds will grow in size. In his campaign, Mousavi was able to tap into the frustrations of youth who are highly educated. Their future is bleak in an economy that faces double-digit unemployment and high inflation. The elimination of illiteracy has led to rising expectations increasingly among those women long oppressed by the Baseej. During the campaign, these women saw in Mousavi’s wife an advocate who spoke of their human rights, which were lost in the days after the Islamic Revolution.

Elite manipulation of the election also speaks to the “segmentation of demand” as defined by Snyder and Ballentine. In a vibrant marketplace of ideas, individuals must be exposed to diverse ways of thinking. A segmented marketplace is characterized by those blockages that prevent the exposure of individuals in one market segment to ideas expressed in others. Another possible occurrence is that individuals are exposed to ideas, which are simultaneously filtered through sources that lead to their distortion. The issue at stake, vulnerability, leaves media in Iran open to capture by partisan segments. The media inside the country in no way competes with the amateur reporting of the citizens on the streets who Twitter and tweet real time accounts of civil unrest. These Iranians accept the responsibility to try to prevent the media from being spoiled as a neutral forum for criticism and debate. Their voices define the public space separate from state control.

The audacious and extraordinary use by the Iranian population of social networking tools and new media is a call to explore ingenious ways America in concert with Europe and other countries throughout the world can use public diplomacy to demonstrate solidarity with the people in Iran. Intervention in the classical sense is not an option there. The Iranian people must decide their own fate without the interference of foreign powers. The brutal repression of the Iranian movement for reform is a striking illustration of “sovereignty as responsibility” meaning that “sovereignty carries with it a responsibility on the part of governments to protect their citizens.” What are the international consequences of the failure to exercise that responsibility? In the aftermath of President Obama’s Cairo speech, Secretary of State Clinton has the opportunity to forge a global coalition, which must weigh those consequences as events in Iran evolve.

Sincere regards and greetings from New York, Colette Mazzucelli

Tags: | Iran |

June 22, 2009

Abbas Daiyar, Daily Outlook Afghanistan, Platinum Contributor (184)

• 1
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Dear Colette,
Thanks for the nice contribution. "It seems very likely that the investigation will result in favor of Ahmedinejad, riots will continue for some days or weeks, and then everything will calm down."
But it seems, the angry protesters won't give up so quickly and easily.
The voices of protesters saying "We want friendship with the world" show their distrust to the theocratic regime. The deep splits among the influential "founders of the Islamic revolution" is a hope of improvement in Iran.
International community can support the protesters through online-resources. President Obama can at least express solidarity with protesters and those murdered in Tehran through state-terrorism. The UN has kept mum, its so hopeless. It must criticize the regime for violence against protesters and warn of international consequences.

Tags: | Iran |

June 22, 2009

Colette Grace Mazzucelli, Hofstra University / New York University, Platinum Contributor (333)

• 0
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Dear Abbas,

Thank you for your insightful comments. There must be innovative ways media and education can re-enforce each other through the use of new technologies to make a difference on the ground in Iran.

Citizens of countries in the region and around the world can express their solidarity through social networking with the protesters. These courageous people continue to find ways to mobilize and protect each other in the face of brutal assaults by the Baseej.

I am interested as well in the role and evolution of education for the next generation of leaders in Afghanistan. Teachers College Columbia University has a long relationship with the country, especially in the field of textbook writing. I continue to research in this area and to speak with colleagues at international organizations about their work in Kabul and other cities. The changing relations between leaders and civil servants in the making of education policy are important to understand as states develop. This area is less explored in policy research.

Local movements can inspire the change that countries in transition require to create effective institutions for governance and state-building. I hope we may remain in touch. All the best to you.

Sincere regards and greetings from New York, Colette

Tags: | Iran / Afghanistan |

June 22, 2009

John Hadjisky, Blogger, Platinum Contributor (328)

• 2
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Prior to the elections, I didn't think Moussavi was any different than Ahmedinejad, other than perhaps the former uses more moderate (and less honest) rhetoric, especially when speaking for Western consumption. I tended to favor the realism of those who preferred the leader who is openly millenarial, eliminationist and confrontational, over the leader who is less so (in public at least).

Still, now that the Iranian street has come alive, it is impossible not to route for them, in spirit if not in politics. I am not sure what their movement now represents, but I don't think they know either. Perhaps the latest revolution will lay the groundwork for real change in Iran.

On a side note, there is a very acute irony in that mainstream news outlets are now airing video from essentially anonymous contributors in Iran as "unverified material" according to the NY Times article posted by Colette. Although it is probably not 100% accurate, this "unverified material" is (so far) proving to be more accurate than the so-called verified material that comes out of Palliwood (for example, the al-Dura hoax. See http://www.m-r.fr/, or in English, a good summary at http://www.seconddraft.org/aldurah.php or http://canadiancoalition.com/forum/messages/9758.shtml).

CNN made its reputation in 1991, when it was the only Western news organization that "had the story" due to its presence in Iraq during the Gulf War. Now things have come full circle, and CNN (and by extension, mainstream media in general) is forced to acknowledge that the social networking movement (the heirs to the blogging tradition) are the only ones that "have the story".

Tags: | Iran | Blogging | Social Networking | Moussavi | Ahmedinejad | Palliwood | al Dura |

June 24, 2009

Member deleted

• 0
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Results (government view) in Iran election gave 63% of the vote to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and 34% to Mir Hossein Mousavi, the strongest opposition candidate, with tiny votes going to the two other contenders. The Mousavi camp say the true result -- allegedly leaked by the interior ministry -- had its candidate winning more than 60% of the vote. What's the truth I do not know. However Ahmadinejad's claims have some base in a phone poll carried out across all 30 provinces three weeks before the vote that gave Ahmadinejad a 2-1 lead. Also his official share of the vote on Friday was almost identical to the second round result in 2005. (More this e.g. in Mail&Guardian online) http://www.mg.co.za/article/2009-06-20-twitter-irans-voice-of-dissent)

What is clear is that in Iran courageous, inspiring young people are putting their bodies in front of bullets and tear gas so the real pressure is boiling on the ground, the street protests are an indication that the era of the clerical rule in Iran may be nearing the end. The share of the young people in Iran's population is among the world's highest and most of the voters in the country are young and they want a system that is representative of the people instead of the unelected institutions, which currently hold power in Iran.

Currently an anti-clerical drive is gaining momentum in Iran especially in urban areas. So is there revolution going on in Iran? I doubt – not yet anyway. With Twitter there is a risk that it amplifies one side while forgetting that Mr. Ahmadinejad has real support – surely majority in rural areas. (more about use of Twitter e.g. in my article "Twitter revolution - case Moldova" - http://arirusila.wordpress.com/2009/04/10/twitter-revolution-%E2%80... )

The real question in Iran – as well in Moldova and Georgia – will be how the present regime will copy the unrest in near future. Violence and oppressive measures are short term actions; the sustainable solution would be to moderate policy by taking citizens’ concerns seriously. If the pressure on the ground will not be channeled through existing regime it is only question of time when boiling will change the regime more or less violent way. (more about theme one may find from my article "Iran-Twitter-Revolution" - http://arirusila.wordpress.com/2009/06/22/iran-%E2%80%93-twitter-%E...

Tags: | Iran | Moldova | Twitter | BalkanBlog | Ari Rusila |

June 24, 2009

Malik Tanwir Amjad, The Helping Hands Pakistan, (4)

• 0
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Every one calls for democracy but if its noit in their own interest, they will not accept it. Same is the scenarion in Iran Elections. West wanted Ahmadinajad to be removed but results didnt favored them and now even its proved that British Intervention was obvious. Its shameful.

Let the Iranians decide their fate and lessons shall be learnt from Iraq, Afghanistan by the west that They shall let the countries decide their own fates and indulging in others matters, not only disturb the geographical strata but it can also disturb the whole world. Iran being in very crucial and sensitive region shall not be made another Iraq or Afghanistan because, Iranians are totally different nation and it will be disastrous to intervene in Iran's matters.

Tags: | Iraq Study Group |

June 24, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

• 1
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Malik, I don't think it is that clear.

Democracy is not merely elections, but more importantly the count of the votes needs to relatively teansparent, widespread, and above all - trusted.

In most (possibly all) established democracies votes are counted by local officials and volunteers and are reported by the free press. Any attempt to 'fix' an important election would be extremely difficult if not impossible, and the citizenry knows that. SO the results are generally trusted except occasionally in the case of extremly close elections like in 2000 in the US.

Even then the vast majority trust the results.

In Iran the government controls which candidates are allowed to run for office, conducts the election, counts the vote in secret. This time they announced 'we win'; and the streets exploded, because many of the people did not trust the process or the result. The irony is that if the government actually won they blew the announcement because they didn't conduct the election openly and honestly. If you behave as though you have something to hide (and control) people will judge you by your foul actionas and not your fair words....

Commenting has been deactivated in the archive. We appreciate your comments on our more recent articles at atlantic-community.org