Here's where Iran gets interesting
There's an issue in that Supreme Leader Khamenei is not the highly regarded religious icon of his predecessor. His religious certifications are not of the highest orders and this has been an unchallenged vulnerability for awhile.
So, when top Iranian religious leaders are beginning to publicly voice support for Moussavi's side, it becomes an issue.
(Again, I just don't see the regime being overturned, but all of this is seriously damaging its sense of legitimacy which may have ramifications down the road.)
So, when top Iranian religious leaders are beginning to publicly voice support for Moussavi's side, it becomes an issue.
(Again, I just don't see the regime being overturned, but all of this is seriously damaging its sense of legitimacy which may have ramifications down the road.)
posted by mikevotes at
8:04 AM
11 Comments:
We're talking about a fracture in the very nucleus of Iran's government. Is this where the real Revolution 2.0 is being fought?
By
-epm, at 9:05 AM
I don't think it's fully conscious, but I think that's what alot of this is about.
Remember that stat that half the country is under 27 or whatever? That means they were born after the revolution, so this form of two tier government doesn't have the same justification for them.
By
mikevotes, at 10:10 AM
There seems to be conflict between the secular and the religious everywhere in the world. Perhaps this is just the Iranian version?
By
Anonymous, at 10:48 AM
I think to some degree it is. Iran's a bit different because they are structurally set up to give the religiously authorized Supreme Council ultimate power.
Like I said above, I also think this is generational.
By
mikevotes, at 11:06 AM
Definitely generational. But there's always been a strong Western leaning element in Iran...especially among the Tehran youth. The Shah being too Western is what caused a violent reaction.
Moussavi is the one I can't figure out. What does he want? Maybe he's being pushed along by events?
By
Anonymous, at 11:10 AM
Moussavi is part of a loosely affiliated troika of "reformists" including Rafsanjani and Khatami. They're vying for power against Khamenei and that structure.
It's secondarily about "reform," and more about the levers of power in the country.
There are alot more players than those making the headlines, and both sides have elements within the government which is one of the reasons this whole crisis is so significant.
It's not the street protesters against the government. It's a cadre using the momentum of the election and street protesters against the current folks in power.
By
mikevotes, at 1:49 PM
Makes sense. It doesn't look as though any of these street demonstrations are exactly spontaneous.
By
Anonymous, at 3:14 PM
No, but importantly, we've also seen no indication thatthe groups are bing funded or organized from outside the way the Georgian or Ukranian "revolutions" were.
These appear to be organically Iranian in their organization.
By
mikevotes, at 3:36 PM
So far it looks that way. But there have been a lot of arrests. Maybe evidence of collusion with Western forces will emerge.
By
Anonymous, at 3:52 PM
I dunno. The Obama folks and CIA seem to be aware of the pitfalls.
Doesn't mean there won't be claims of evidence, but I sincerely doubt they'd get that involved. Historically, the Iranian human rights folks have pretty openly rejected US help because of fear of a taint.
By
mikevotes, at 5:07 PM
I don't think Obama or the CIA were involved. Usual suspects most likely. The protests were organized by SNS and seem aimed at Western audiences. McCain's little tough-guy appearance was no accident. I like the way Lugar shut him up.
By
Anonymous, at 6:50 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home