Why have the Iranian Government and its senior officials (including President Ahmadinejad) been announcing all sorts of advances in enrichment of uranium, and taunting the West about it’s potential nuclear prowess recently? The answer may have far less to do with Iran’s so-called desire to destroy Israel and far more with the domestic political scene in Iran, one in which the political opposition is still staging mass protests against Ahmadinejad’s right to govern.
The anniversary of the 1979 revolution has become a test of strength between Mr. Ahmadinejad and an opposition movement that took root after the elections, creating the biggest political challenge since the fall of the shah.
Apart from the crackdown on the streets, the authorities on Wednesday drastically slowed Internet service in Iran and shut down text messaging services. One official said that Gmail, the Google e-mail service, would be blocked.
But news reports indicated that the measures had not kept protesters off the streets.
An Iranian opposition Web site said security forces fired shots and tear gas at supporters of an opposition leader, Mir Hussein Moussavi, as they mounted a counter-rally in central Tehran.
“Security forces opened fired at protesters and fired tear gas in central Tehran,” Reuters quoted the Green Voice Web site as saying, citing witnesses. Another opposition Web site, Jaras, said that security forces attacked another opposition leader, Mehdi Karoubi, when he attended a rally marking the anniversary.
Jaras also said security forces attacked former President Mohammad Khatami and briefly arrested his brother and his brother’s wife, who is a granddaughter of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Revolution.
The authorities had warned that they intended to confront protesters harshly. Witnesses quoted by The A.P. said the police deployed hundreds of officers in central Tehran to block protests.
The confluence of the protests and Mr. Ahmadinejad’s nuclear claims offered a graphic illustration of how much Iran’s foreign policy is being driven by domestic concerns, analysts said.
Much like any government without a popular mandate, Iran’s rulers have seized upon the one issue that distracts any nation’s populace from internal debate and dissent regarding their legitimacy: by ginning up the bogeyman of external threats from foreign “enemies.”
We in America saw the way the Bush administration, in reaction to far less turbulent protests of its policies, played the fear of “Terrorism” and “Islamofascism” again and again to diminish and weaken its domestic political opponents. Thus, we should not be surprised when Ahmadinejad stirs the nuclear pot presumably with the support of Iran’s Supreme Ruler, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
They are a regime under siege from within after committing massive election fraud to prevent a less conservative leader, Mir Hussein Moussavi, from being elected last summer. It would be well for all who see Iran’s recent announcements regarding its space and nuclear programs as evidence of an impending nuclear threat to realize that what is driving the regime’s actions and rhetoric at this point is its decision to play the “patriot” card to wean its people away from the internal political opposition movement that threatens its right to rule.
When our leaders ratchet up their rhetorical response to Ahmadinejad, they are playing his game, one that has far less to do with us and far more to do with tarring internal dissenters as traitors to the Islamic Revolution. Because, as we know all too well here in the US, illegitimate leaders love to claim that any opposition to their abuses of power constitutes treason, and the easiest way to do advance that political strategy is to claim that since one’s nation is “at war” all true “patriots” should support their President.
The thing with Iran is that MAD doesn’t really apply to them.
I think it’s obvious that you’re correct on this particular announcement, Steve, because I think they’re bluffing right now. Most nuclear experts don’t believe them when they say they’ve reached the 20% enrichment point yet; it’s simply not possible to do it that quickly.
So yeah, this announcement is more about patriotism and trying to get the citizens to remember their “common enemy” and whatnot.
But their overall reach for weapons is the same as any other: geopolitical influence, especially around the Gulf States.
You guys are aware of this aren’t you?
http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/02/03/polls-suggest-everything-you-think-you-know-about-ira
ns-tainted-election-is-wrong/
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/652.php?nid=&id=&pnt=6
52&lb=
“Analysis of Multiple Polls Finds Little Evidence Iranian Public Sees Government as Illegitimate“
“Indications of fraud in the June 12 Iranian presidential election, together with large-scale street demonstrations, have led to claims that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not actually win the election, and that the majority of Iranians perceive their government as illegitimate and favor regime change.
An analysis of multiple polls of the Iranian public from three different sources finds little evidence to support such conclusions.
The analysis conducted by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland (PIPA), was based on:
The study sought to address the widely-discussed hypotheses that Ahmadinejad did not win the June 12 election and that the Iranian people perceive their government as illegitimate. It also sought to explore the assumption that the opposition represents a movement favoring a substantially different posture toward the United States. The analysis of the data found little evidence to support any of these hypotheses.
Steven Kull, director of PIPA, said, “Our analysis suggests that it would not be prudent to base US policy on the assumption that the Iranian public is in a pre-revolutionary state of mind.”
On the question of whether Ahmadinejad won the June 12 election, in the week before the election and after the election, in all polls a majority said they planned to or did vote for Ahmadinejad. These numbers ranged from 52 to 57% immediately before the election and 55 to 66% after the election. “
None of this is to say Iran is Xanadu. But that plenty of Iranian’s support the government’s fiercely independent stand and that most are quite religious.
Frankly I don’t trust the accuracy of polls in a country where people are aware of mass arrests of dissenters, of bully boys in the streets who have shot and killed innocent bystanders, of the use of torture to elicit confessions, of wiretapping and electronic surveillance, etc. In an atmosphere of such mistrust, do you really believe that those polls reflect an unbiased sample of Iranian opiinion?
It’s the equivalent of the US military conducting a poll of Iraqis as to whether we should maintain an indefinite presence in their country during the height of the war in 2004-2005 when we were filling prisons with thousands of Iraqi males after conducting nightly sweeps by the US military and Shi’ite death squads were on nightly patrols to do the dirty work we had trained them to do. The number of honest responses in such situations is likely to be low in my opinion.
Frankly I don’t trust the polls in a country that fakes the results of the biggest poll of all, i.e. the national election.
Steve, several of those polls were conducted BEFORE the June 12 election. I agree that I don’t trust everything from Iran or even our government here. But there were 45,000 poling stations, each staffed with several volunteers, typically from a local school. And there were 40,000 Musavi observers. Furthermore, in the week after the election, the government published the results per ballot box.
By now, I would have expected a handful of the two hundred thousand plus election workers and observers to say “those are not the results we saw” or a Musavi observer to say “I was thrown out before the counting started” Or “men with guns stole the boxes.” You simply can’t have mass fraud in an election with 46 million voters without hundreds of thousands of witnesses.
Yes they are afraid, but if “millions” can come out and protest against the government (in the first week before the clamp down) somebody among them would have had the guts to speak up. He would have had support from the anti-Ahmadinejad elements in the government such as Rafsanjani.
The fact that by now, 8 months later no witness to fraud has come up, I have to be skeptical about the claims of fraud.
The protesters themselves are not proof. There were plenty of Anti-Chavez protesters in Venezuela, there were plenty of Anti-Allende protesters in Chile, there were plenty of Anti-Mossadegh protesters in Iran in 1953.
Thanx for reading
Well, if some of the polls were conducted before the June 12 election, then they are seriously out of date, aren’t they? I mean, a lot has happened since the elections. Like, the elections happened, for one thing. Then there were massive protests and massive crackdowns. But none of that means much, I guess.
The protests are not proof, no. But they are both cause and effect of public opinion.
There were 40,000 Musavi observers. Maybe that’s why Musavi and his supporters charged widespread fraud.
“You simply can’t have mass fraud in an election with 46 million voters without hundreds of thousands of witnesses.” Right, you can’t. Did the government do any credible investigation? No.
But “…somebody among them would have had the guts to speak up.” I have rarely seen so many people with guts to speak up. A lot of them were among those arrested, tortured, and killed.
You’re hinting that the whole thing has been manipulated for Western consumption. But what you ignore is that the split is profound and goes right to the heart of the Revolutionary leadership. Foreign intelligence operations will always have some kind of involvement in situations like that. The question is whether they are leading or following. I think the evidence is overwhelming that what happened represents a very deep, genuine crisis in Iranian political life, even if a lot of the American interpretation is distorted and simplistic.
One of us is engaging in circular reasoning, and I don’t think it’s me.
“Well, if some of the polls were conducted before the June 12 election, then they are seriously out of date, aren’t they?”
If A poll was conducted on June 11, and there was, and it shows Ahmadinejad getting 57% of the votes, and it did, then it is not at all surprising that he got 60% the very next day. Maybe everybody changed their minds since then, but the Green movement’s claim of fraud has no evidence for it and substantial evidence against it. That does not mean they don’t have other valid complaints, only that election fraud isn’t one of them.
“Right, you can’t. Did the government do any credible investigation? No. “
Did the opposition provide the slightest bit of evidence to investigate? Could they provide anybody who could say that on such polling station x-irregularity happened? Not for the government to investigate, but for the public to be aware.
You may or may not know that in the 2 weeks subsequent to the election, Musavi submitted his written complaints to the guardian council. He complained of A-nijad using state media to campaign, that he handed out food and gifts in poor areas to buy votes, etc. All valid points, I grant you, but nowhere does he say ballot boxes were stolen/stuffed or anything of the sort. He does not claim to have witnesses to that effect, but that they are afraid to speak out.
Nor does he claim so on his website, where he regularly writes of oppression, tyranny etc.
“”I have rarely seen so many people with guts to speak up. A lot of them were among those arrested, tortured, and killed.”
Fair enough, but given that so many were ready to protest, and on Ashura day to burn police vehicles, why not the courage to present evidence that would prove their case?
“You’re hinting that the whole thing has been manipulated for Western consumption.”
Yes I am. I have no proof so I don’t accuse directly. However, The CIA has overthrown (or tried to) governments in Chile, Guatemala, Venezuela, and Iran itself in 1953. Public protests are a component of these attemps. Also, It is US government policy to overthrow Iran’s government. In 2007, the NYT reported that Bush authorized $400 million to assist “pro democracy groups” and to “destabilize” Iran’s government. In Iraq, next door, the US protected the MEK, an anti-Iranian terrorist organization.
That is not “proof” but it is enough to make me suspicious.
“But what you ignore is that the split is profound and goes right to the heart of the Revolutionary leadership.”
If true, then all the more reason for the thousands of witnesses to alleged vote fraud to have spoken up since there are elements of the government ready to take there side.
None of this is to say Iran’s government is wonderful. I hope for greater freedom and liberty for everyone in Iran. But as of now, nobody has presented evidence of election fraud. The purpose of your entire post was not to present evidence, but to try to explain the lack of it.
There were a lot of polls.
Notice the wide variances among them. Articles like this one from The New York Times were written allegedly election fraud by an unnamed Interior Ministry employee.
Iran’s Guardian Council spokesperson admitted that the vote count in fifty cities exceeded 100% eligible voters. In addition all three of the opposition candidates reported instances of irregularities:
That seems like sufficient evidence of fraud to me to call into question the legitimacy of the current regime.
Yes there were a lot of polls. The two that were conducted by western agencies (TFT and WPO) using known methodology both reported Ahmedinejad as winning, before and after the election. The nonresponse rate in the September WPO poll, according to your wikipedia link, was no worse than a US poll. Not everybody agrees to be questioned even in this country.
The vote count exceeding 100% in some areas has been addressed. There is no voter registration in Iran as here and people vote wherever they happen to be, not by residence. People leaving the big cities and going home for the weekend and voting in their small towns can distort the vote…especially with an 87% turnout.
The MOI employee, I must admit sounds like some real evidence. But one anonymous man, although I grant you he is afraid, isn’t enough.
I reiterate that none of this is to say Iran’s government is right as rain (although its no worse, indeed much better than Egypt, Jordan or Saudi Arabia)
Keep in mind that as your own post suggests, appeals to patriotism work. That’s why governments use them. I suspect there are a lot of Iranians who mirror our own rapture right and view their country as doing God’s work on earth and resent those “hippies” that bash their own government.
In fact, since Iran is an even more religious country than this one, there might even be enough of them to win an election.
Anyway, thank you for reading my post. Best wishes to all.
“Iran’s rulers have seized upon the one issue that distracts any nation’s populace from internal debate and dissent regarding their legitimacy: by ginning up the bogeyman of external threats from foreign “enemies.” “
Steven, I agree with the main message of this post, and most of your points. However, let us please not underestimate the very real external threat to Iran from Israel, and from the United States.
I simply do not accept your characterization of the external threat to Iran as “ginned up”, or as involving “bogeymen”, nor to I consider realistic your placing the word “enemies” in scare quotes. The bellicose hype, and bull**, and out and out lies being pushed by the Obama administration, the usual suspects outside the government, and the happily compliant media (most recently our old friend the NYT) are terrifyingly reminiscent of the selling of the attack on Iraq.
There is a very, very real possibility that Israel will attack Iran this year, which it cannot do without the permission and active cooperation of the United States, which, among other things, controls Iraqi air space in addition to being a major supplier of weapons and military funding to Israel.
Please, however valid and important your point is, do not minimize or pooh pooh the threat to Iran. It is extremely real, and extremely serious not only for Iran and Iranians, but for the rest of the world. In this case there is no question that it is not Iran, but the United States and Israel that are the greatest threat to world peace and security. It is at least as likely as not that Israel will attack Iran if something does not happen to stop it. That would be devastating for Iran, Iranians, and deeply damaging to any likelihood of progress toward a more liberal, democratic system there. In addition, it is virtually impossible to imagine an attack on Iran that would not lead to WW III.