I wish I could harbor even a smidgen of the confidence the vice president
has that Dr. Ahmadinejad's sweep was really a fraud. In the
Times on-line, Roger Cohen also harbors the belief that the
balloting results were a fraud. And he came away with what for him
must have been a desolating wish:
Majir
Mirpour grabbed me. A purple bruise disfigured his arm. He
raised his shirt to show a red wound across his
back.
'They beat
me like a pig,' he said, breathless. They beat me as I tried to help a
woman in tears. I don't care about the
physical pain.
It's the pain in my heart that hurts.
He looked
at me and the rage in his eyes made me want to toss away my
notebook.
Well, yes, Roger, you and your little notebook have been misleading
people on Iran for a long time. You can actually stop doing that
without throwing away your notebook. The journalism
profession does need one more unemployed.
My impression is that the incumbent's margin of victory was too big to
have been fraudulent and the loser's numbers also too big. Tyrannies don't play around with the numbers like this. A dictator
usually wants 99% of the voters to have been for him. But in Iran we were
seeing the remnants of a true civil society, the last expressions of
which were during the time of the Shah. It would be a blessing if
this were to be the beginnings of a renaissance.
Maybe the regime fiddled around a bit with the numbers at the polls and
after the polling. Still, the outcome had a sense of
authenticity. A vast majority in the country is poor, and
there is where the backing for Ahmadinejad and his ayatollah patrons is
deepest. Mir Hussein Moussavi's support was most solid, among the
economic and intellectual elites in northern Tehran and in other big
cities and among students of which there are millions, many of them
discontented and pro-western, at least in style-of-life and aspirations
to openness to the world. Moussavi, however, is an old hack who
drew closer to his backers once they seemed to have become a critical
mass. And it was there, in these precincts, that the delusion of a
coming victory was born.
It is a critical mass that terrifies regimes like the one in power. That is why the real brutality came after the elections and after the
protests. And the brutality will continue. Robert F. Worth
and Nazila Fathi report in the Times that more than 100 opposition
members of parliament have been detained today, Sunday. Yes, there
are many brave Persians in the country. But they should not be
demonstrating against A'jad. This election was structurally already
half a fraud. They should be demonstrating against the Supreme
Leader, Ali Khameinei, who really sets the laws in the country. (You might want to read his hilarious disquisition on masturbation,
doubtless only in the male expression.)
None of this deflected the Omaba administration, through the voice of Joe
Biden, from reassuring whoever is reassured by such
sentiments that American engagement with the criminal and war-making
class in power will continue. But why in fact did the vice
president rush on the very morrow of the election to hearten those he
thought stole the process? Was he actually trying to demoralize the
opposition? Maybe it is true that Biden talks before he
thinks.
The fact is that, if Sa'ad Hariri's partial victory in Lebanon was also a
partial victory for Barack Obama's tenets at Cairo, the triumph of the
mullahs in Persia is an utter rejection of the president's words, his
tone and his very message to the Muslim world. I suppose that's too
bad. But it does clarify something, doesn't it? And please
don't tell me that there was no relationship between the balloting and
the speech. Had Moussavi won the tally the press would have
credited the Cairo inspirational with the results.
Pace the vice president's eagerness to assuage Tehran, there will
presumably still be an internal struggle in the administration over U.S.
positions vis-a-vis Iran. One of the tout va bien crowd,
Reza Aslan (a friend of my son's and someone I like), has just been
appointed to Dennis Ross' Iran staff. Do not be put off by the fact
that he is assistant professor of creative writing at the University of
California, Riverside and has held the Truman Capote Fellowship in
Fiction. His latest gig is as a writer for the Puffington Host. Still, Aslan may yet be able to recognize a
fact. Now is a good time to see.
Print
COMMENTS (37)
Given the history of elections in the evolution of the species homo sapiens, who would ever imagine that, one way or another, fraud is not an integral part of them?
I quote for example Gore v. Bush in 2000.
When discussing the relationship between democracy and corruption the illusion of those who take civics book...or the words from government officials...literally is that the locus of political and economic power here has nothing whatever to do with how governments function.
When of course it has everything to do with it.
So I won't waste my time trying to disillusion them. For others however....those who are still stuggling sincerely to get to the bottom of this crucial relationship...here ... view full comment
Given the history of elections in the evolution of the species homo sapiens, who would ever imagine that, one way or another, fraud is not an integral part of them?
I quote for example Gore v. Bush in 2000.
When discussing the relationship between democracy and corruption the illusion of those who take civics book...or the words from government officials...literally is that the locus of political and economic power here has nothing whatever to do with how governments function.
When of course it has everything to do with it.
So I won't waste my time trying to disillusion them. For others however....those who are still stuggling sincerely to get to the bottom of this crucial relationship...here are three suggestions:
1] follow
2] the
3] money
And for extra credit follow the cash beyond government and wealth to events such as the White House Correspondence Dinner or the Gridiron Club fete to the powers that be.
More than those occupying the top notches of Wall Street, government and the mainstream press, you can find lots and lots of celebrities too.
Following the money doesn't get any better than this.
george
Damn, Marty you beat me to it.
I was going to post on Roger Cohen's confession:
"I’ve also argued that, although repressive, the Islamic Republic offers significant margins of freedom by regional standards. I erred in underestimating the brutality and cynicism of a regime that understands the uses of ruthlessness."
Looks like he has been mugged by reality. Will he learn from his experience or will he find someone else to blame?
Damn, Marty you beat me to it.
I was going to post on Roger Cohen's confession:
"I’ve also argued that, although repressive, the Islamic Republic offers significant margins of freedom by regional standards. I erred in underestimating the brutality and cynicism of a regime that understands the uses of ruthlessness."
Looks like he has been mugged by reality. Will he learn from his experience or will he find someone else to blame?
Juan Cole, love him or hate him, laid out a pretty convincing case for fraud:
www.juancole.com/.../stealing-iranian-election.html
It's also worth reposting parts of an Al Jazeera article Juan Cole cites:
"Ahmadinejad had apparently taken the northwestern city of Tabriz with some ease (Will's note: 57% almost his national percentage).
Tabriz is the heart of East Azerbaijan, and Azeris are among the tightest ethnic groups in the country, unfailingly voting along ethnic lines.
In the 2005 presidential election, Mohsen Mehralizadeh was a largely unknown and wholly unsuccessful candidate. He ... view full comment
Juan Cole, love him or hate him, laid out a pretty convincing case for fraud:
www.juancole.com/.../stealing-iranian-election.html
It's also worth reposting parts of an Al Jazeera article Juan Cole cites:
"Ahmadinejad had apparently taken the northwestern city of Tabriz with some ease (Will's note: 57% almost his national percentage).
Tabriz is the heart of East Azerbaijan, and Azeris are among the tightest ethnic groups in the country, unfailingly voting along ethnic lines.
In the 2005 presidential election, Mohsen Mehralizadeh was a largely unknown and wholly unsuccessful candidate. He came in seventh and last, and yet he still won the Azeri vote in the Azerbaijani provinces. Mir Hossein Mousavi is an Azeri from Tabriz.
Elsewhere, Mehdi Karroubi failed to take his home state of Lorestan; in Khuzestan, Mohsen Rezai, a local scion, was expecting at least two million votes. His total for the entire country has failed to breach one million (Will's note, it was ultimately 300,000)."
If McCain had won the 2008 election with 62% of the vote, it would have been fishy. If he had won Boston and South Chicago, then you could be sure it was BS.
"My impression is that the incumbent's margin of victory was too big to have been fraudulent and the loser's numbers also too big."
With that blinding insight into geopolitcs, you should give up your day job and sweep the ice at curling alley.
"My impression is that the incumbent's margin of victory was too big to have been fraudulent and the loser's numbers also too big."
With that blinding insight into geopolitcs, you should give up your day job and sweep the ice at curling alley.
One thing I find curious about the "fraud or not" debate (admittedly, just getting under way here) is that only a couple of weeks ago a number of posters were criticizing Obama's Cairo speech and some earler statements for being more oriented to the Iranian ruling establishment than the Iranian people. I found that not very convincing, as it's the Iranian regime, not the people, that runs the nucleara program, but nonetheless they made some good points.
But this weekend's events pose a significant problem. If it is a fraud, then the White House has an extra level of difficulty in its approach to Iran, which now has a regime under threat of a gradual dissolving of legitim ... view full comment
One thing I find curious about the "fraud or not" debate (admittedly, just getting under way here) is that only a couple of weeks ago a number of posters were criticizing Obama's Cairo speech and some earler statements for being more oriented to the Iranian ruling establishment than the Iranian people. I found that not very convincing, as it's the Iranian regime, not the people, that runs the nucleara program, but nonetheless they made some good points.
But this weekend's events pose a significant problem. If it is a fraud, then the White House has an extra level of difficulty in its approach to Iran, which now has a regime under threat of a gradual dissolving of legitimacy. The Mullahs and the extreme political elements are getting more paranoid and authoritarian, which will have consequences we can't see. So to that extent the critiique of Obama could be seen as justified: he should have made his pitch to the Iranian people and not to the government, and from now on he should do that -- and forget the negotiations.
If it isn't a fraud, however, then that knocks the socks off those self-same critics. If it isn't a fraudulent election result, as Marty suggests, but an authentic one then it's the Iranian people who have returned Achmadinnerjacket to office, not the "regime." It's the Iranian people in their democratic majority that have declared themselves behind the toothy nutter's policies and world-view. So this idea of a natural pro-American majority in Iran is so much bs. So Obama should now do what? -- accept the educated Teheran middle-class and nobody else as "the Iranian people"?
And it's particularly frustrating that we may not know . . .
"And please don't tell me that there was no relationship between the balloting and the speech. Had Moussavi won the tally the press would have credited the Cairo inspirational with the results."
Because the press would have made a foolish conjecture, you are therefore entitled to as well?
"And please don't tell me that there was no relationship between the balloting and the speech. Had Moussavi won the tally the press would have credited the Cairo inspirational with the results."
Because the press would have made a foolish conjecture, you are therefore entitled to as well?
I was just reading an account of the rigged election in Iran. And, concommitently, how people enraged by it are confronted with the choice of what to do about it.
Some here in The Spine might imagine that if they were there they would boldly confront the government in fierce defiance.
It's easy to be fiercely defiant when it's just an abstarction.
But many in Iran now have to struggle with the age old tug of war between fear and outrage. You are outraged by what has been done to you but you know that if you act on the outrage you may be arrested, beaten, jailed....even tortured or killed.
And these decisions always unfold in circumstantial contexts that are unique to each person. For example, s ... view full comment
I was just reading an account of the rigged election in Iran. And, concommitently, how people enraged by it are confronted with the choice of what to do about it.
Some here in The Spine might imagine that if they were there they would boldly confront the government in fierce defiance.
It's easy to be fiercely defiant when it's just an abstarction.
But many in Iran now have to struggle with the age old tug of war between fear and outrage. You are outraged by what has been done to you but you know that if you act on the outrage you may be arrested, beaten, jailed....even tortured or killed.
And these decisions always unfold in circumstantial contexts that are unique to each person. For example, someone may be incensed at what was done to snuff out reform in Iran Friday, but he may have 2 children whereby, if he is arrested and thrown in jail....what will happen to them?
There is no way of measuring these things, of course. Which, perhaps, is why those zealots sittting comfortable in their dens posting to blogs like this are all the more committed to pretending there is.
george walton
Maybe no Schadenfreude, but there is some irony here.
Reports are that Hezbollah is beating the Iranian Citizens. Hezbollah has been a source of national pride. Mousavi who lost the election helped in establishing Hezbollah.
It may be a metaphor. I have argued here before that the terrorism of the 1980's has finally been beaten by Western resolve and is no longer effective. Their attcks evoke only sympathy and harsh repraisals. Everyone who supports Hezbollah ends up in rubble.
Now they are turning against the people who created them. Mecilessly beating them. Not because they are infidels or Jews, but because the Supreme Leader told them to.
Who's Next?
Maybe no Schadenfreude, but there is some irony here.
Reports are that Hezbollah is beating the Iranian Citizens. Hezbollah has been a source of national pride. Mousavi who lost the election helped in establishing Hezbollah.
It may be a metaphor. I have argued here before that the terrorism of the 1980's has finally been beaten by Western resolve and is no longer effective. Their attcks evoke only sympathy and harsh repraisals. Everyone who supports Hezbollah ends up in rubble.
Now they are turning against the people who created them. Mecilessly beating them. Not because they are infidels or Jews, but because the Supreme Leader told them to.
Who's Next?
"Tyrannies don't play around with numbers like this."
I'd be very interested to hear about this trend in how tyrannies play around with numbers, please explain. You are using definitive statements that have no way of being proved.
What partisan arrogance. Marty, no one can ever say for sure what happened in this election.
"Tyrannies don't play around with numbers like this."
I'd be very interested to hear about this trend in how tyrannies play around with numbers, please explain. You are using definitive statements that have no way of being proved.
What partisan arrogance. Marty, no one can ever say for sure what happened in this election.
Perhaps Marty should have read this by Mehdi Khalaji before the election:
www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php
Because if he had, he'd know that the regime in Iran does in fact "play around with [the] numbers like this." Khamenei openly supported A'jad, and the mullahs below him in the real regime know which side the bread is buttered on, so we expect their fingers to be on all the scales within their reach. The Interior Ministry is riddled with corruption and abuses, and so aside from already strong partisan preference for A'jad, those folks need A'jad to stay in power to ke ... view full comment
Perhaps Marty should have read this by Mehdi Khalaji before the election:
www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php
Because if he had, he'd know that the regime in Iran does in fact "play around with [the] numbers like this." Khamenei openly supported A'jad, and the mullahs below him in the real regime know which side the bread is buttered on, so we expect their fingers to be on all the scales within their reach. The Interior Ministry is riddled with corruption and abuses, and so aside from already strong partisan preference for A'jad, those folks need A'jad to stay in power to keep their rackets going, and so they have their fingers on the scales too, except they're also the ones actually holding the scales. Then there's the IRGC and affiliated militia structures, and they've also taken an active role, mostly (though not uniformly) in favor of A'jad. Again, they have some ability to tip the electoral scales. The Iranian electoral process is vulnerable to fraud at every level, from the voter lists to the vote counting, in ways that would impress the old Chicago machine. With all these actors all committing fraud toward A'jad at every point in the process, it's really quite easy to make the numbers add up as they came out.
That Marty is (A) surprised by the result and/or (B) incredulous at the claims of decisive fraud only suggests that he's not really paying attention, rather like how Condi Rice was shocked at the Hamas victory in the Palestinian elections the Bush administration ginned up even though anyone with a calculator could have predicted those election results to within two legislative seats if they simply paid attention.
Sorry to ruin your morning Marty -
Iran's supreme leader ordered Monday an investigation into allegations of election fraud, marking a stunning turnaround by the country's most powerful figure and offering hope to opposition forces who have waged street clashes to protest the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
State television quoted Ayatollah Ali Khamenei directing a high-level clerical panel, the Guardian Council, to look into charges by pro-reform candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi, who has said he is the rightful winner of Friday's presidential election.
The decision comes after Mousavi wrote a letter appealing to the Guardian Council and met Sunday with Khamenei, who holds almost li ... view full comment
Sorry to ruin your morning Marty -
Iran's supreme leader ordered Monday an investigation into allegations of election fraud, marking a stunning turnaround by the country's most powerful figure and offering hope to opposition forces who have waged street clashes to protest the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
State television quoted Ayatollah Ali Khamenei directing a high-level clerical panel, the Guardian Council, to look into charges by pro-reform candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi, who has said he is the rightful winner of Friday's presidential election.
The decision comes after Mousavi wrote a letter appealing to the Guardian Council and met Sunday with Khamenei, who holds almost limitless power over Iranian affairs. Such an election probe by the 12-member council is uncharted territory and it not immediately clear how it would proceed or how long it would take.
Election results must be authorized by the council, composed of clerics closely allied with the unelected supreme leader. All three of Ahmadinejad's challengers in the election -- Mousavi and two others -- have made public allegations of fraud after results showed the president winning by a 2-to-1 margin.
"Issues must be pursued through a legal channel," state TV quoted Khamenei as saying. The supreme leader said he has "insisted that the Guardian Council carefully probe this letter."
The day after the election, Khamenei urged the nation to unite behind Ahmadinejad and called the result a "divine assessment."
Wander,
If there was fraud in the Iranian elections, probably it could not have been pulled off without at least the tacit acquiescence of the Supreme Leader and / or the Guardian Council. Ergo, assuming that they determine that there was no fraud or only minimal fraud that would not have changed the overall outcome (i.e., Mad Mahmoud still wins). Of what value is that? Will you or anyone else believe what they say?
Hershel Ginsburg
Tel Aviv / Jerusalem / Efrata
Wander,
If there was fraud in the Iranian elections, probably it could not have been pulled off without at least the tacit acquiescence of the Supreme Leader and / or the Guardian Council. Ergo, assuming that they determine that there was no fraud or only minimal fraud that would not have changed the overall outcome (i.e., Mad Mahmoud still wins). Of what value is that? Will you or anyone else believe what they say?
Hershel Ginsburg
Tel Aviv / Jerusalem / Efrata
Edwards Deming, the quality guru, famously said: "In God we trust; all others must have data." So far, this thread is pretty much a data-free zone. Nevertheless, the Juan Cole observations cited by willpastor are provocative. How indeed did all three losing candidates manage to lose in their own ethnic bailiwicks? Until that anomaly is explained, lots of folks, both domestic Iranians and foreigners, myself included, are going to remain skeptical.
Edwards Deming, the quality guru, famously said: "In God we trust; all others must have data." So far, this thread is pretty much a data-free zone. Nevertheless, the Juan Cole observations cited by willpastor are provocative. How indeed did all three losing candidates manage to lose in their own ethnic bailiwicks? Until that anomaly is explained, lots of folks, both domestic Iranians and foreigners, myself included, are going to remain skeptical.
There is evidence to support the view that the election results were a fiction.
Marty says that most people in Iran are illiterate peasants and that they would have been convinced to vote for Ahmadinejad. This may have been true in Ahmadinejad own province. Illiterate peasants tend to vote for their own ethnic candidate.
However, by that same logic it makes no sense that the illiterate peasant in a province from which the opposing candidate originate would also have voted for Ahmadinejad. This is what the Iranian authorities are asking their people to believe.
Moreover the margin of victory is also a fiction. Is it likely that Ahmadinejad got over 60% of the vote in every province? I d ... view full comment
There is evidence to support the view that the election results were a fiction.
Marty says that most people in Iran are illiterate peasants and that they would have been convinced to vote for Ahmadinejad. This may have been true in Ahmadinejad own province. Illiterate peasants tend to vote for their own ethnic candidate.
However, by that same logic it makes no sense that the illiterate peasant in a province from which the opposing candidate originate would also have voted for Ahmadinejad. This is what the Iranian authorities are asking their people to believe.
Moreover the margin of victory is also a fiction. Is it likely that Ahmadinejad got over 60% of the vote in every province? I doubt it.
There is evidence to suspect fraud; there is no evidence to think that election results were genuine.
Finally, the speed with which the results were released was also a surprise. Iran is a huge country and most ballots were counted by hand. How likely is it that the count would have been completed in a day or so?
The fact that Khameini took sides and blessed the results is also a sign that the ruling Mullahs were nervous about the “reform candidate.” Theocracies know that any move towards liberalization would in time end their rule.
I agree with you Ginzy. I also cannot envision a scenario at this point where the dictator is deposed.
But objectively, the situation is too fluid to make definitive statements, especially on the intent of the Iranian people. Whoever claims to be sure of what is going or what the true motivations of those in power are is simply displaying partisanship. It seems apparent to me that everything is up for grabs.
I don't suddenly see the Supreme Leader as a democracy activist. But he is a politician like anyone else. He wants to stay in power. He may also know something we don't.
Images of goons stabbing 17 years olds will only weaken his legitimacy or hi ... view full comment
I agree with you Ginzy. I also cannot envision a scenario at this point where the dictator is deposed.
But objectively, the situation is too fluid to make definitive statements, especially on the intent of the Iranian people. Whoever claims to be sure of what is going or what the true motivations of those in power are is simply displaying partisanship. It seems apparent to me that everything is up for grabs.
I don't suddenly see the Supreme Leader as a democracy activist. But he is a politician like anyone else. He wants to stay in power. He may also know something we don't.
Images of goons stabbing 17 years olds will only weaken his legitimacy or his ability to get what he needs from other countries. He seems to me to be as Machiavellian as any leader throughout history. The Dictator ultimately weakens him. This is to out advantage. At least right now.
make that "our advantage."
make that "our advantage."
NORMBLOG has some interesting comments on the election:
Some highlights:
"12.55pm. 'Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has ordered an investigation into claims of vote-rigging and fraud in last week's presidential election'. Whether anyone will believe its findings is another matter."
"1.22pm. At least one person is sanguine - Jimmy Carter. He 'said he expected no major change in Iran's policies with Mr Ahmadinejad's reelection. "I think this election has b[r]ought out a lot of opposition to his policies in Iran, and I'm sure he'll listen to those opinions and hopefully moderate his position"'. Keep taking the tablets, Jimmy."
For the rest:
view full comment
NORMBLOG has some interesting comments on the election:
Some highlights:
"12.55pm. 'Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has ordered an investigation into claims of vote-rigging and fraud in last week's presidential election'. Whether anyone will believe its findings is another matter."
"1.22pm. At least one person is sanguine - Jimmy Carter. He 'said he expected no major change in Iran's policies with Mr Ahmadinejad's reelection. "I think this election has b[r]ought out a lot of opposition to his policies in Iran, and I'm sure he'll listen to those opinions and hopefully moderate his position"'. Keep taking the tablets, Jimmy."
For the rest:
normblog.typepad.com/.../rolling-post-on-iran.html
NORMBLOG has some interesting comments on the election:
Some highlights:
"12.55pm. 'Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has ordered an investigation into claims of vote-rigging and fraud in last week's presidential election'. Whether anyone will believe its findings is another matter."
"1.22pm. At least one person is sanguine - Jimmy Carter. He 'said he expected no major change in Iran's policies with Mr Ahmadinejad's reelection. "I think this election has b[r]ought out a lot of opposition to his policies in Iran, and I'm sure he'll listen to those opinions and hopefully moderate his position"'. Keep taking the tablets, Jimmy."
For the rest:
view full comment
NORMBLOG has some interesting comments on the election:
Some highlights:
"12.55pm. 'Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has ordered an investigation into claims of vote-rigging and fraud in last week's presidential election'. Whether anyone will believe its findings is another matter."
"1.22pm. At least one person is sanguine - Jimmy Carter. He 'said he expected no major change in Iran's policies with Mr Ahmadinejad's reelection. "I think this election has b[r]ought out a lot of opposition to his policies in Iran, and I'm sure he'll listen to those opinions and hopefully moderate his position"'. Keep taking the tablets, Jimmy."
For the rest:
normblog.typepad.com/.../rolling-post-on-iran.html
Marty, would you consider Mubarak's Egypt or Salih's Yemen to be dictatorships/tyrannies? Because in the last elections they both received consierably less than 99%. See, where you are wrong, and where your prejudices (i.e. wanting to believe the people of Iran are just as complicit as the leader's in Iran's dangerous intransigence) make you avoid actual analysis, is that the "elections" in the Arab dictatorships were mere referendums, where the voters could say "yes" or "no" to the question of "should Saddam (or Asad) stay as President?" (Hint: the correct answer was "yes", and don't you forget it). These are multi-p ... view full comment
Marty, would you consider Mubarak's Egypt or Salih's Yemen to be dictatorships/tyrannies? Because in the last elections they both received consierably less than 99%. See, where you are wrong, and where your prejudices (i.e. wanting to believe the people of Iran are just as complicit as the leader's in Iran's dangerous intransigence) make you avoid actual analysis, is that the "elections" in the Arab dictatorships were mere referendums, where the voters could say "yes" or "no" to the question of "should Saddam (or Asad) stay as President?" (Hint: the correct answer was "yes", and don't you forget it). These are multi-party, multi-candidate elections. The Iranians aren't stupid. This vote fix was a clear "fuck you" to the opposition and to reformers, but making it 99% would just be insane.
Oh for Chissakaes, Carter is becoming a parody of himself.
Oh for Chissakaes, Carter is becoming a parody of himself.
of course it was a fraud but I am not sure why, since Khamani holds the real power and he decides who is eligible to run I assume that the former PM of the regime won't really rock any boats, maybe reform the economy and make it more efficient. strange country.
of course it was a fraud but I am not sure why, since Khamani holds the real power and he decides who is eligible to run I assume that the former PM of the regime won't really rock any boats, maybe reform the economy and make it more efficient. strange country.
I find the point about losing in one's home base convincing. it smells fraudulent to me, but I'm with Blackie in wondering why they bothered, considering the Prez there isn't really in charge, least of all in foreign policy.
However, it is unclear to me how large the modernist elite is in Iran. We get a completely Tehran-centric view of the country in the MSM, and at 75 million, it's a big place. Maybe the countryside really does love the mullahs and A'jad, and voted accordingly. I'd like to not believe that, but my understanding of the Persians is not very deep.
I find the point about losing in one's home base convincing. it smells fraudulent to me, but I'm with Blackie in wondering why they bothered, considering the Prez there isn't really in charge, least of all in foreign policy.
However, it is unclear to me how large the modernist elite is in Iran. We get a completely Tehran-centric view of the country in the MSM, and at 75 million, it's a big place. Maybe the countryside really does love the mullahs and A'jad, and voted accordingly. I'd like to not believe that, but my understanding of the Persians is not very deep.
Mr Peretz: This post will go down as one of the top 10 lows/embarassments of your career!
Mr Peretz: This post will go down as one of the top 10 lows/embarassments of your career!
This post is one of the most pathetic things I've read on this site since tnr begged for the invasion of Iraq.
This post is one of the most pathetic things I've read on this site since tnr begged for the invasion of Iraq.
Butchie- I might be wrong, but I think the regime was worried about things getting out of hand if a reformer was elected, even a cautious reformer. A regime that comes to power on the tide of a popular coup always has that in the back of their minds- they know that, while they aren't accountable to public wishes, they are affected by them. I think they hoped they could stem the tide of reform while still making gestures at democracy, and hope that the opposition would sink into their late-period Khatami apathy. I think they might have overplayed their hand, though. This is just a guess, so take it for what it is worth.
Butchie- I might be wrong, but I think the regime was worried about things getting out of hand if a reformer was elected, even a cautious reformer. A regime that comes to power on the tide of a popular coup always has that in the back of their minds- they know that, while they aren't accountable to public wishes, they are affected by them. I think they hoped they could stem the tide of reform while still making gestures at democracy, and hope that the opposition would sink into their late-period Khatami apathy. I think they might have overplayed their hand, though. This is just a guess, so take it for what it is worth.
Rhubarbs has given what appears to be the only logical explanation of the rigging of an essentially symbolic election that does nothing to alter who controls Iran at the top or change that country's outlook toward the rest of the world. Yes, political patronage corrupts totalitarian polities as well as democracies.
Rhubarbs has given what appears to be the only logical explanation of the rigging of an essentially symbolic election that does nothing to alter who controls Iran at the top or change that country's outlook toward the rest of the world. Yes, political patronage corrupts totalitarian polities as well as democracies.
70% of the vote came from the cities, where A'd is weakest. And yet A'd got 65% of the total vote.Do the math. Of course, it's a fraud. But I think that this is a good outcome, contrary to what many people are saying.It will further radicalize the populace and increase the antipathy of countries around the world to Iran's nonsense.With any luck, this will lead to chaos, if not utter collapse. The patient will have to get a lot worse before it can get better. As long as Iran has a Supreme Leader, it will never be a democracy. There will only be voting.A democracy involves the rule of law, not the rule by fiat or veto of a Supreme Leader.
70% of the vote came from the cities, where A'd is weakest. And yet A'd got 65% of the total vote.Do the math. Of course, it's a fraud. But I think that this is a good outcome, contrary to what many people are saying.It will further radicalize the populace and increase the antipathy of countries around the world to Iran's nonsense.With any luck, this will lead to chaos, if not utter collapse. The patient will have to get a lot worse before it can get better. As long as Iran has a Supreme Leader, it will never be a democracy. There will only be voting.A democracy involves the rule of law, not the rule by fiat or veto of a Supreme Leader.
"However, it is unclear to me how large the modernist elite is in Iran. We get a completely Tehran-centric view of the country in the MSM, and at 75 million, it's a big place. Maybe the countryside really does love the mullahs and A'jad, and voted accordingly. I'd like to not believe that, but my understanding of the Persians is not very deep."
I have the same thoughts, butchie. And what strikes me is that the smartest criticism of Obama on his approach to Iran -- that he was stroking the regime rather than appealing over their heads to the "people" -- was posited on a belief that the regime only has minority support now, or at least that something ... view full comment
"However, it is unclear to me how large the modernist elite is in Iran. We get a completely Tehran-centric view of the country in the MSM, and at 75 million, it's a big place. Maybe the countryside really does love the mullahs and A'jad, and voted accordingly. I'd like to not believe that, but my understanding of the Persians is not very deep."
I have the same thoughts, butchie. And what strikes me is that the smartest criticism of Obama on his approach to Iran -- that he was stroking the regime rather than appealing over their heads to the "people" -- was posited on a belief that the regime only has minority support now, or at least that something approaching a majority wants to see the back of the authoritarian "Islamic" lock-down. But if it isn't a fraud, then that suggests a misreading of opinion and the recognition that it's a distinct minority (an educated urban class) that is pro-American and willing to push for a different Iran.
The demonstrations and the confusions beginning to appear even in the establishment facade do suggest that stuff is going on, though.
Irony, the demonstrations this afternoon were 5 miles long, on a main 6-lane boulevard - the site of the largest anti-Shah demonstrations 30 years ago. There are demonstrations in Mashhad, Rasht, Esfahan and Ahvaz, and even in Ardabil, a provincial capital in northwestern Iran known in Iran principally for its backwardness - made worse as a result of A'jad's government there while he was its provincial Governor.
The numbers released by Interior Ministry employees indicate 19 mo for Mousavi, 13 mo for Karrubi, 9 million for Rezaei and around 5 mo for A'jad. The numbers correspond well to the natural and historical constituency of each. To understand what I mean, we need to pu ... view full comment
Irony, the demonstrations this afternoon were 5 miles long, on a main 6-lane boulevard - the site of the largest anti-Shah demonstrations 30 years ago. There are demonstrations in Mashhad, Rasht, Esfahan and Ahvaz, and even in Ardabil, a provincial capital in northwestern Iran known in Iran principally for its backwardness - made worse as a result of A'jad's government there while he was its provincial Governor.
The numbers released by Interior Ministry employees indicate 19 mo for Mousavi, 13 mo for Karrubi, 9 million for Rezaei and around 5 mo for A'jad. The numbers correspond well to the natural and historical constituency of each. To understand what I mean, we need to put the 2005 elections in perspective - and this is why Marty's post is not only ignorant but outright offensive.
In the first round of the 2005 elections, A'jad came in third by about 500 K votes. However, sometime during the day after the elections, some 800 K votes were magically discovered in Tehran, almost all of which were for A'jad. This propelled him to second place and the run offs. There, he ran against Rafsanjani, who had no base of support among the reformists and who had alienated many of the traditionalists during his technocrats' government in the early 90s. So he lost. To extrapolate from that loss that A'jad had a large base of support in Iran would be to suggest that Chirac's 80% win in the second round of the last French Presidential elections somehow demonstrated a deep well of support for that cynical oik. Well, any such suggestion would be daft; and the same would be true for A'jad's win in 05.
Fast forward to 12 June, and the situation is easy to see. First, the Interior Ministry under-estimated the voters by about 12%. Second, they did not send enough ballots to many urban districts, and when they did, it was really late in the evening. Third, they started announcing results too soon after the closing of the polls, and the results made no sense. Here is one example:
The birthplace of Mousavi is Shabestar, in Azerbaijan. This is a mid-size town. 100 K ballots had been sent there, but it was not enough, so a few thousand more were shipped during the day. The official newspaper of the Leader and the official news agency then reported ONLY 7600 votes - yeah, a total tally of 7600 - of which 60% went to A'jad. This was too comical for words, especially given that the Interior Ministry came up with a figure ten times higher and a small margin of victory for Mousavi. But then, this was 30,000 votes short of the total number of ballots sent there - which have not been found. The best guess is that those 30 K votes were for Mousavi and they simply vanished. The same pattern can be seen in the birthplaces of the other candidates as well. (We have the figures thanks to attempts at humiliating the candidates.)
Let's not kid outselves - the 32 million who would have voted for the "reformist" block are not "pro-American", just as Mousavi is a half-hearted reformist - he kinda found his voice only after A'jad attacked his wife in their debate. And yet - it is that wife who might yet be Iran's Yeltsin: even as the husband was calling for calm and "seeking the resolution of the matter through legal means", the wife stood on a car and called for demonstrations - whether or not permitted - and a general strike tomorrow.
Marty's post is one of the worst poop to sully these pages in years.
Yes ick -- I take your point and from what you're saying there is no possible way the result is authentic. In that case, I'd simply reiterate that it does now pose problem A for the Obama administration -- how to deal with an authoritarian regime that is shedding legitimacy over its nation's long-term prospects and the desirability of not proceeding with the nucear program.
Yes ick -- I take your point and from what you're saying there is no possible way the result is authentic. In that case, I'd simply reiterate that it does now pose problem A for the Obama administration -- how to deal with an authoritarian regime that is shedding legitimacy over its nation's long-term prospects and the desirability of not proceeding with the nucear program.
sorry let me redo that:
how to deal with an authoritarian regime, that is shedding its legitimacy, over its nation's long-term prospects and the desirability of not proceeding with its nuclear program.
sorry let me redo that:
how to deal with an authoritarian regime, that is shedding its legitimacy, over its nation's long-term prospects and the desirability of not proceeding with its nuclear program.
This post is more victimology aimed at an agenda. This way, they can say that it isn't just the tyrannical dictators who are totalitarian anti-semetic theocrats....they have the support for the Iranian populace.
It's all part of the agenda.
This post is more victimology aimed at an agenda. This way, they can say that it isn't just the tyrannical dictators who are totalitarian anti-semetic theocrats....they have the support for the Iranian populace.
It's all part of the agenda.
More evidence that Marty is way off on this one:
"Iran Election: How Rigged Was It?
Considering the evidence"
By Michael Weiss | 3:45 pm June 15, 2009
"But perhaps most reflective of widespread and systemic rigging is the results the Kurdish province of Iran, a region that has consistently, since the 1979 revolution, voted in small numbers for the opposition candidate (the Kurds are a much persecuted minority in Persia and don’t bother with elections that will not alter their plight). This year, apparently, they turned out overwhelmingly for Ahmadinejad."
www.tabletmag ... view full comment
More evidence that Marty is way off on this one:
"Iran Election: How Rigged Was It?
Considering the evidence"
By Michael Weiss | 3:45 pm June 15, 2009
"But perhaps most reflective of widespread and systemic rigging is the results the Kurdish province of Iran, a region that has consistently, since the 1979 revolution, voted in small numbers for the opposition candidate (the Kurds are a much persecuted minority in Persia and don’t bother with elections that will not alter their plight). This year, apparently, they turned out overwhelmingly for Ahmadinejad."
www.tabletmag.com/.../iran-election-how-rigged-was-it
Some posters here and others elsewhere have legitimately asked the question, if it's basically a electoral coup of sorts, then why in such an apparently grotesque and almost deliberately provocative way? Wouldn't a somewhat nervous regime normally want to fudge it, do a few percentage points, but keep people really uncertain and willing to go with the result, even begrudgingly? Especially if a regime is concerned about a minimal democratic legitimacy? Doesn't this at least suggest that the result might be broadly accurate?
The answer is yes, that's true. With one ominous exception, however.
And that is, the distinct possibility that this regime -- or crucial parts of it ... view full comment
Some posters here and others elsewhere have legitimately asked the question, if it's basically a electoral coup of sorts, then why in such an apparently grotesque and almost deliberately provocative way? Wouldn't a somewhat nervous regime normally want to fudge it, do a few percentage points, but keep people really uncertain and willing to go with the result, even begrudgingly? Especially if a regime is concerned about a minimal democratic legitimacy? Doesn't this at least suggest that the result might be broadly accurate?
The answer is yes, that's true. With one ominous exception, however.
And that is, the distinct possibility that this regime -- or crucial parts of it -- wanted not only to win but to rub people's noses in the fact that, ultimately, the election was all a joke and no other result was ever possible. That this regime wanted to say clearly to Iranians, there's no point in looking forward to 2013 or 2017 or any damn year, because we're not going to give up power at any point whatsoever. That this regime was willing to tough it out when the demos and protests came, because they believe that that is better, for them, than a close result that people would have accepted more easily and just get on with working toward the next election.
That this is a fraud that was not meant just to be done, but was meant also to be seen to be done.
Why the need to go all this way to Machiavelian sophistication way of explaining the irrationality of this regime? We tend to forget that these are true believers.
The question to ask: given that their extreme religious piety and faith in the the rightness of their religion and their ways are genuine, does their behaviour still seem so bizarre and outrageous?
Why the need to go all this way to Machiavelian sophistication way of explaining the irrationality of this regime? We tend to forget that these are true believers.
The question to ask: given that their extreme religious piety and faith in the the rightness of their religion and their ways are genuine, does their behaviour still seem so bizarre and outrageous?
What should we make of Iran's contested elections? Here's a roundup of some of TNR's best
What should we make of Iran's contested elections? Here's a roundup of some of TNR's best
bloggingheads.tv/.../20548
bloggingheads.tv/.../20548