The street protests must be working....
Supreme Leader Khamenei takes the absolutist line on the election results and threatens a crackdown on the protesters. (AP, Reuters, NYTimes, WaPo, Guardian....)
Khamenei has chosen to create a decision point in this crisis. He has effectively drawn the line in the sand which I fell pretty sure the protesters will cross. (Heck, I think he almost motivated them to cross it.) What does he do when they come back to the streets defying his position?
If the government does begin a harder crackdown, they're inviting escalation and shifting the ground of the protests from the election result to Khamenei himself.
My favorite quote,
Related: (NYTimes) The Khamenei/Republican Guard affiliated militias, the Basijis, are threatening "bolder action," and the WaPo has a really nice short definitional piece on the history, structure, and role of the Basijj.
(PS. Calling these people "protesters" is slightly misrepresentative. They are far differently behaved than the word "protesters" generally connotates. If you watch these hundreds of thousands walk down the streets in silence, it's really uniquely creepy.)
Khamenei has chosen to create a decision point in this crisis. He has effectively drawn the line in the sand which I fell pretty sure the protesters will cross. (Heck, I think he almost motivated them to cross it.) What does he do when they come back to the streets defying his position?
If the government does begin a harder crackdown, they're inviting escalation and shifting the ground of the protests from the election result to Khamenei himself.
My favorite quote,
"If the difference as 100,000 or 200,000 or 1 million, one may say fraud could happen. But how can one rig 11 million votes?" Khamenei asked during Friday prayers at Tehran University.
Related: (NYTimes) The Khamenei/Republican Guard affiliated militias, the Basijis, are threatening "bolder action," and the WaPo has a really nice short definitional piece on the history, structure, and role of the Basijj.
(PS. Calling these people "protesters" is slightly misrepresentative. They are far differently behaved than the word "protesters" generally connotates. If you watch these hundreds of thousands walk down the streets in silence, it's really uniquely creepy.)
posted by mikevotes at
6:41 AM
7 Comments:
I find it ironic that an authoritarian leader who came to power through a revolution that overthrew an authoritarian government is admonishing this generation for protesting -- revolting? -- against the establishment. That public protests are not the way to seek redress.
The greatest irony, however, is that he excoriates those contesting wholesale ballot-box fraud to handle their grievances through... the ballot-box. It reminds me of the cartoon where a company has a complaint box for employees to address management, but inside the box there's a little paper shredder. When employees complain, management directs them to drop a complaint in the box.
I agree with Mike that it is entirely believable that Ahmadinejad received the most votes. The protests -- as I understand them -- are more about the sham of the "vote counting" and not necessarily that their guy lost. Also, that this has very little to do with foreign policy, etc, and everything to do with domestic issues in Iran.
By
-epm, at 7:48 AM
I have no idea how the voting came out, but I do find it hard to believe that Ahmadinejad won nearly 2 to 1.
That said, this is very much about internal Iran, about the nature of government, the influence of religion, etc.
If the Basij really come in, I think that identity struggle will come to the fore.
By
mikevotes, at 8:02 AM
Agreed.
I'm wondering what affect, if anything, this will have on Iraqi politics. I really don't know, but do we really need another country in the region suffering internal turmoil?
By
-epm, at 8:12 AM
It's funny. I haven't read a thing on that.
By
mikevotes, at 10:15 AM
Speech and words do incite people, which is why I support Obama's silence on this event. The last thing we need is the loud voice of America rightfully being accused of motivating the protesters and having it be seen as an American movement, not a movement by the Iranian people.
I don't question that Ahmadinejad probably did get the most votes.
Does the Supreme Leader really want a violent confrontation with the protesters? To prove to Iranians he is the power of the country. To allow the World to see more deaths and bloody violence on his orders. These rulers never took a Dale Carnegie course.
By
Unknown, at 1:23 PM
'Does the Supreme Leader really want a violent confrontation with the protesters?'
No I don't think so. I think he's warning certain people not to throw fire bombs at militia stations.
By
Anonymous, at 1:34 PM
Time, I support a very quiet US position because that's what the Iranian demonstrators want. It robs the Khamenei/Ahmadinejad camp of one of their most effective tools, claiming US interference.
Over the last 5 years or so, since the Iraq war launch, Iranian and Egyptian human rights campaigners (as Muslim nation examples) have made an active effort not to be seen with US government personnel, as they know that association damages their cause.
Think back to that Cairo speech. Were there top activists in the room? Did any of them let themselves be caught in a photo op with Obama? No. They know the negative effect of US association,
And that's why the Obama folks are playing it right by staying very far on the sidelines.
And, My hunch is that he doesn't want direct hard confrontation. In his ideal, his threat stops the demonstrations. In reality, it will probably be the Basij street thugs who do the initial crackdown.
....
Anon, I tend to agree. I think a good part of that message was to put Moussavi on the spot. He's been benefitting from the protests with next to no cost. I think part of that speech was to turn eyes to him and make him take more responsibility.
By
mikevotes, at 2:25 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home