Iran Elections Thread

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

I think it is quite likely that some compromise must be worked out between both rivals, or things will get bloody very soon. A lot of news is getting around that the whole election wasn't just rigged; it seems that the votes in some cases were simply tossed aside and they cooked up the figures out of thin air.

[The Original Nex]

The MSM has completely dropped the ball on coverage of this (unless the NYT Blog can be called part of the MSM).

I've been getting most of my coverage from Andrew Sullivan's blog and the NYT's blog which are both doing excellent work and getting inside information.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/

[The Original Nex]

Apologies for the double post.

Here's Columbia University Iran expert Gary Sick's analysis of the situation, which is more and more being referred to as a "coup".

Naturally there's speculation contained herein given somewhat spotty reports from within Iran.

Iran's political coup

If the reports coming out of Tehran about an electoral coup are sustained, then Iran has entered an entirely new phase of its post-revolution history. One characteristic that has always distinguished Iran from the crude dictators in much of the rest of the Middle East was its respect for the voice of the people, even when that voice was saying things that much of the leadership did not want to hear.

In 1997, Iran’s hard line leadership was stunned by the landslide election of Mohammed Khatami, a reformer who promised to bring rule of law and a more human face to the harsh visage of the Iranian revolution. It took the authorities almost a year to recover their composure and to reassert their control through naked force and cynical manipulation of the constitution and legal system. The authorities did not, however, falsify the election results and even permitted a resounding reelection four years later. Instead, they preferred to prevent the president from implementing his reform program.

In 2005, when it appeared that no hard line conservative might survive the first round of the presidential election, there were credible reports of ballot manipulation to insure that Mr Ahmadinejad could run (and win) against former president Rafsanjani in the second round. The lesson seemed to be that the authorities might shift the results in a close election but they would not reverse a landslide vote.

The current election appears to repudiate both of those rules. The authorities were faced with a credible challenger, Mir Hossein Mousavi, who had the potential to challenge the existing power structure on certain key issues. He ran a surprisingly effective campaign, and his “green wave” began to be seen as more than a wave. In fact, many began calling it a Green Revolution. For a regime that has been terrified about the possibility of a “velvet revolution,” this may have been too much.

On the basis of what we know so far, here is the sequence of events starting on the afternoon of election day, Friday, June 12.

* Near closing time of the polls, mobile text messaging was turned off nationwide
* Security forces poured out into the streets in large numbers
* The Ministry of Interior (election headquarters) was surrounded by concrete barriers and armed men
* National television began broadcasting pre-recorded messages calling for everyone to unite behind the winner
* The Mousavi campaign was informed officially that they had won the election, which perhaps served to temporarily lull them into complacency
* But then the Ministry of Interior announced a landslide victory for Ahmadinejad
* Unlike previous elections, there was no breakdown of the vote by province, which would have provided a way of judging its credibility
* The voting patterns announced by the government were identical in all parts of the country, an impossibility (also see the comments of Juan Cole at the title link)
* Less than 24 hours later, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamene`i publicly announced his congratulations to the winner, apparently confirming that the process was complete and irrevocable, contrary to constitutional requirements
* Shortly thereafter, all mobile phones, Facebook, and other social networks were blocked, as well as major foreign news sources.

All of this had the appearance of a well orchestrated strike intended to take its opponents by surprise – the classic definition of a coup. Curiously, this was not a coup of an outside group against the ruling elite; it was a coup of the ruling elite against its own people.

It is still too early for anything like a comprehensive analysis of implications, but here are some initial thoughts:

1. The willingness of the regime simply to ignore reality and fabricate election results without the slightest effort to conceal the fraud represents a historic shift in Iran’s Islamic revolution. All previous leaders at least paid lip service to the voice of the Iranian people. This suggests that Iran’s leaders are aware of the fact that they have lost credibility in the eyes of many (most?) of their countrymen, so they are dispensing with even the pretense of popular legitimacy in favor of raw power.

2. The Iranian opposition, which includes some very powerful individuals and institutions, has an agonizing decision to make. If they are intimidated and silenced by the show of force (as they have been in the past), they will lose all credibility in the future with even their most devoted followers. But if they choose to confront their ruthless colleagues forcefully, not only is it likely to be messy but it could risk running out of control and potentially bring down the entire existing power structure, of which they are participants and beneficiaries.

3. With regard to the United States and the West, nothing would prevent them in principle from dealing with an illegitimate authoritarian government. We do it every day, and have done so for years (the Soviet Union comes to mind). But this election is an extraordinary gift to those who have been most skeptical about President Obama’s plan to conduct negotiations with Iran. Former Bush official Elliott Abrams was quick off the mark, commenting that it is “likely that the engagement strategy has been dealt a very heavy blow.” Two senior Israeli officials quickly urged the world not to engage in negotiations with Iran. Neoconservatives who had already expressed their support for an Ahmadinejad victory now have every reason to be satisfied. Opposition forces, previously on the defensive, now have a perfect opportunity to mount a political attack that will make it even more difficult for President Obama to proceed with his plan.

In their own paranoia and hunger for power, the leaders of Iran have insulted their own fellow revolutionaries who have come to have second thoughts about absolute rule and the costs of repression, and they may have alienated an entire generation of future Iranian leaders. At the same time, they have provided an invaluable gift to their worst enemies abroad.

However this turns out, it is a historic turning point in the 30-year history of Iran’s Islamic revolution. Iranians have never forgotten the external political intervention that thwarted their democratic aspirations in 1953. How will they remember this day?

[Zac Naloen]

n



Not sure on the source of the middle image, but the colour one's are from the bbc showing unrest in Tehran.

[Gerald Tarrant]

This Flickr photo stream is being updated often, and has many views of the unrest.

Lots of pics, 56k bewareFlickr

[The Original Nex]

From Sullivan:

14 Jun 2009 11:08 am
The Real Results?

This is hearsay - but under conditions of a police state coup, we are best advised to glean what information we can, hold it provisionally, and test it as time passes. Here's what Kos Diarist Electronic Maji is hearing from Iranian journalist friends under lockdown:
Unofficial news - reports leaked results from Interior Ministry:
Eligible voters: 49,322,412
Votes cast: 42,026,078
Spoilt votes: 38,716
Mir Hossein Mousavi: 19,075,623
Mehdi Karoubi: 13,387,104
Mahmoud Ahmadi-nejad (incumbent): 5,698,417
Mohsen Rezaei (conservative candidate): 3,754,218


If this is true, it would explain the comically lop-sided total in reverse - a lovely gesture from the regime taken direct from Machiavelli - and the panicked reaction by the regime.

Emphasis mine.

Like he said, so far it's hearsay based on alleged leaks from within the Ministry of Interior. But if this pans out...whoa...

[Zac Naloen]

This is translated from here : - http://www.peykeiran.com/Content.aspx?ID=2153

Grand Ayatollah Sanei in Iran has declared Ahmadinejad's presidency illegitimate and cooperating with his government against Islam. There are strong rumors that his house and office are surrounded by the police and his website is filtered. He had previously issued a fatwa, against rigging of the elections in any form or shape, calling it a mortal sin.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/t ... sents.html

[Prannon]

Beeb

Crowds join Ahmadinejad victory rally

Tens of thousands of people have joined a rally in central Tehran to celebrate the re-election of Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The president's closest opponent in the election, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, has lodged an official appeal against the result amid continuing angry protests.

Security forces have arrested up to 100 members of reformist groups, accusing them of orchestrating the violence.

Mr Ahmadinejad denied any vote-fixing, saying the result was "very accurate".

At an earlier news conference, the president accused foreign media of refusing to accept the result because they did not like it.

"Forty million people have taken part in this process. How can they question it?" he said.

US doubt

Asked about Iran's nuclear programme and Tehran's relations with foreign powers, he said the nuclear debate "belongs to the past", and that Iran had "embraced" the idea of an international effort to eliminate nuclear weapons.

Global reaction to the election has been muted, but US Vice-President Joe Biden told broadcaster NBC there was "an awful lot of doubt" about the result.

Mr Ahmadinejad's closest rival in the election campaign, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, announced on Sunday he had lodged an official appeal appeal against the result to Iran's Guardian Council.

"I urge you Iranian nation to continue your nationwide protests in a peaceful and legal way," he said in a statement.

Mr Mousavi has called several times for his supporters to avoid violence, but angry protesters have been setting light to vehicles and throwing stones in Tehran.

Reuters reported that police charged a 2,000-strong group of students who were protesting at the University of Tehran.

Leader's endorsement

Several parts of the city have been sealed off by the authorities to prevent the unrest spreading.

Dozens of activists have been arrested, with reports saying those detained were members of pro-reformist political parties which had backed Mr Mousavi during the election campaign.

Those held were said to include Mohammad Reza Khatami, brother of former President Mohammad Khatami.

Many of them are reported to have been freed since.

The state news agency, Irna, said those arrested were involved in orchestrating Saturday's protests in Tehran.

The controversy flared after a high turnout on Friday - estimated at 85% - led Mr Mousavi's supporters to expect a close result.

But official results gave Mr Ahmadinejad a landslide victory. His final share of the vote was almost 63%.

The result was quickly endorsed by Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader.

Our correspondent John Simpson, in Tehran, says the truth about the election may never be known.

But many observers in Iran feel that the final result did not reflect the extraordinary numbers of people who turned out to vote, our correspondent adds.

The President is quite theatric and dramatic.

I think the analysis by people saying this is a coup is correct, but I wonder if there's something even deeper going on here. I have a feeling that this isn't just a power grab by Ahmadinejad from the Reformists, but also a move by Khamenei and his clique of clerics against other clerics forming Iran's religious government. Reports of certain clerics denouncing this vote as a fraud would indicate that many even in Iran's religious circles disapprove of the way things are done there.

This can only hurt Khamenei and Ahmad in the long run. So long as the rest of the world remains uncertainly silent to keep this an Iranian crisis, and as long as the people are angry, the government is going to have to step lightly lest they have a real social uprising on their hands.

[The Original Nex]

There is also the suggestion that this was started within the military establishment

See the original post for articles link within the text.

Rise of the Military
Brian Ulrich Jun 13 2009 - 4:06pm Iran

This account by Iranian film director and Mousavi spokesman Mohsen Makhbalbaf makes a great deal of sense:

"According to Mr. Makhbalbaf, in the early hours after voting had ended, the Interior Ministry had called Mr. Mousavi’s campaign headquarters to inform them that Mr. Mousavi would be the winner and, therefore, Mr. Mousavi must prepare a victory statement. Mr. Mousavi was, however, asked by the Ministry not to boast too much, in order not to upset Mr. Ahmadinejad’s supporters. Many of the president’s supporters are among the ranks of the Basij militia, and thus armed.

"According to Mr. Makhbalbaf, the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was also informed of the developments. He also recommended a 'good management' of the victory statement, meaning not boasting greatly about the victory, because that would be in Iran’s national interests and stability.

"At the same time, the reformist newspapers were also informed that they can prepare their Saturday edition to declare Mr. Mousavi the winner, but were not allowed to use the word pirouzi (victory) in their articles, in order not to upset Mr. Ahmadinejad’s supporters. One reformist newspaper prepared its front page with the title, 'People took back the flag of their country [from Mr. Ahmadinejad].'

"But, just a few hours later, a center that had been set up by Mr. Mousavi in Gheytarieh (in northern Tehran) for monitoring the election and vote counting, was attacked by armed security agents. They ransacked the center, destroyed computers, and attacked the staff. Supporters of Mr. Mousavi intervened and arrested 8 security agents. The police was called to take them to prison, but the police released the attackers.

"According to Mr. Makhbalbaf, the central headquaters of Mr. Mousavi’s campaign was also surrounded by security forces, as was the Interior Ministry building. Then, new data began to be released by the Ministry, indicating that Mr. Ahmadinejad had won the elections decisively."

A coup that originated with the military rather than the clerical or lay political leaders resolves what I saw the the main flaw with Juan Cole's reconstruction. It also dovetails well with Interior Ministry employees' warnings that Ayatollah Mesbah-Yazdi, who is influential in the military, issued a fatwa authorizing manipulation of the elections.

A coup led by the military is also easier to explain than one ordered by Ayatollah Khamene'i. I had been thinking about the implications of a Mousavi victory, and concluded that, given the continuing conservative dominance of Parliament, the most important changes for Iranians would be a different economic policy and the replacement of someone hostile to the old revolutionary establishment embodied by the likes of Rafsanjani with someone who was actually a part of it. With that in mind, let's go to Walter Posch's election backgrounder:

"On the other hand, if Ahmadinjed wins, the relatively broad scope of political participation for various ideological and political trends will be dramatically reduced, as the reformists will be pushed aside and purged. This in turn will lead to an ideological monopoly for Mesbah-Yazdi and the Haqqaniye network, where a new generation of political clerics is trained. This also means a final legitimization of the Revolutionary Guards’ control over the economy, complementing the tax-free cash cows of the 'pious' foundations and further suffocating free enterprise. Finally, it would mean the strengthened
indirect and direct control of the Revolutionary Guards over the executive branch. Former IRGC members already control most of the Parliament, are present in the government, and, of course, in the Higher National Security Council (HNSC)."

In other words, the often anti-democratic and militarily inclined forces which have been rising in Iran were threatened by the more traditional establishment, and acted to preserve their interests. We already saw, starting in 2005, how this movement had pushed together reformists and centrist pragmatists, resulting in Mousavi's alliance with the likes of Rafsanjani and Khatami's conservative 1997 opponent Ali Akbar Nateq-Nouri. If so, this was not a coup perpetrated by the clerical establishment, but by a rising hard-line counter-establishment that did not want a repeat of the 2006 elections for the Assembly of Experts.

UPDATE: Khamene'i's role in this affair is emerging as a key issue within analysis. Above, I followed Makhbalbaf's account, in which the Leader initially accepted the results. Gary Sick, however, credibly suggests that the Mousavi camp was lied to so as to make them complacent.

UPDATE: Just a quick clarification: "Military" in this case refers to the IRGC and basij militias.

[Straha]

>SNIP<

That makes a lot of sense, actually, and I think Sick is off the ball (again) when it comes to his analysis of events. Firstly, if you want to make the Mousavi campaign complacent you don't tell them you've won before you take the victory away from them in a blatant vote rigging campaign. Second, YOU DON'T TELL THE PRESS THAT MOUSAVI HAS WON. That's just idiotic and goes against Vote Rigging 101. Third, you don't tell the Clerical Hierarchy that Mousavi has won and then blatantly rig the vote like this. A lot of clerics base their legitimacy on the fact that Iran has a democratically elected republican government. A republican government where all the candidates are vetted by clerics to be Islamicly acceptable in the eyes of revolutionary mullahs, yes, but a republican government nonetheless.

The Iranian military, however, doesn't have the same scruples as a number of the clerics. Ever since the late 90s when they dove feet first in with the establishment they've always wanted to see a hardliner in power, and Ahmadinejad is one of their own, so religiously right he makes the clerics uneasy, and he has a history of revolutionary activity (deeply associated with the Revolutionary Guard.) He also has no plan of ever putting the military in a position where drawdowns might be a possibility (even if he doesn't control the military directly.)

EDIT: Also, the fact that Sanei has come out against the election may be nothing, or it may be the tip of the iceberg. The man is both a very liberal Grand Ayatollah (not a contradiction in terms) and very very astute (why he's managed to stay in the spotlight while being a liberal Grand Ayatollah.) He even has a website in English. If he's come out against the election other clerics may come out too, and if you can get more demonstrations in the street that might force an official declaration that the election has been rigged. The problem there is that then the clerics are between a rock and a hard place. If they declare the election as illegitimate than they've essentially declared that their own government is illegitimate, and they have to fight their own government to get a legitimate election to take place. If they back the results, however, than they lose any shred of legitimacy they had in the first place and have all but admitted that they don't control their own government anymore.

[Straha]

Mir Hossein Mousavi’s, the main reformist rival to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, letter to the important ayatollahs in the holy city of Qom, asking them to protest the fraud and declare it against Islam, has sparked protests by the ayatollahs and clerics as well.

The Association of Combatant Clerics, which consists of moderate and leftist clerics and includes such important figures as former president Mohammad Khatami, Ayatollah Mohammad Mousavi Khoiniha, and Grand Ayatollah Abdolkarim Mousavi Ardabili, issued a strongly-worded statement, calling the results of the election invalid.

Grand Ayatollah Saafi Golpaygaani, an important cleric with a large number of followers, warned about the election results and the importance that elections in Iran retain their integrity.

Grand Ayatollah Yousef Saanei, a progressive cleric and a confidante of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic, has declared that Mr. Ahmadinejad is not the legitimate president and cooperation with him, as well as working for him, are haraam (against Islam and a great sin). He has also declared that any changes in the votes by unlawful means are also haraam. Several credible reports indicate that he has traveled to Tehran in order to participate in nationwide protests scheduled for Monday (June 18). It is said that he has planned a sit-in in some public place, in order to further protest election fraud. His website has been blocked.

Credible reports also indicate that security forces have surrounded the offices and homes of several other important ayatollahs who are believed to want to protest election fraud. Their websites cannot be accessed, and all communications with them have been cut off.

The nation is waiting to hear the views of Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, the most important ayatollah living in Iran and the strongest clerical critic of the conservatives. He has been asked to issue a clear statement, explaining his views about the election fraud.

Mr. Khatami, who campaigned strongly for Mr. Mousavi, is also under house arrest.

The Association of Combatant Clerics are powerful established people in the world of Iranian politics. If they, and a significant part of the Qom hierarchy, are coming down against election, then a lot more is going on behind the scenes to fight it. It also means that the Military has pissed off at least part of the clergy, and the foremost rule of thumb for Iranian politics for hundreds of years has been to never piss off the Clergy. It got the Qajars overthrown, it got Mossadeq tossed out of office, it got the Pahlavis kicked out and it installed the revolutionary government. I'm not sure the rule still holds quite as true as it once did (the clergy have burned up a lot of their good will with the people through three decades of mismanagement) but it's still not a smart thing to do.

[montypython]

In reference to the military, is this regarding the regular armed forces such as the Artesh, or the Pasdaran?

[Straha]

In reference to the military, is this regarding the regular armed forces such as the Artesh, or the Pasdaran?

The Artesh are poor, have jackshit political influence, and have been setting themselves up as the professional apolitical counterparts to the Pasdaran (for just such an occurrence.) The Pasdaran and the Basij auxiliary are the guys behind this, and the people with the most to lose if the election went against them.

[Straha]

More news, more signs of a fraud:

...

From 3:30 P.M. until 4:15 P.M., the scene at the Hyatt was festive, despite the news earlier in the day that the reformist headquarters had been sacked and prominent reformists arrested. Everyone had a story about a relative who had never voted before, who was a royalist or an all-purpose skeptic, who was wearing green in the streets or simply casting a vote for Mousavi. There was only one way this could go. Turnout, we heard, was over eighty per cent.

But then the first ominous Facebook update came in. The Ministry of Interior had announced that of twenty-five million votes counted thus far, sixteen million were for Ahmadinejad. The time, in Tehran, was just past midnight. The polls in the cities had just closed. It was not time to panic yet; maybe this was just the rural vote. But the mood in our little circle darkened. It wasn’t true, came another update; only five million had been counted, and of them, both candidates were claiming sixty per cent. Then the tally reached ten million, with sixty-seven per cent for Ahmadinejad. And then the most sinister news of all: the public had been told that if anyone approached the Interior Ministry, which would be the obvious site for a protest of the vote count, the police had orders to shoot.

There can be no question that the June 12, 2009 Iranian presidential election was stolen. Dissident employees of the Interior Ministry, which is under the control of President Ahmadinejad and is responsible for the mechanics of the polling and counting of votes, have reportedly issued an open letter saying as much. Government polls (one conducted by the Revolutionary Guards, the other by the state broadcasting company) that were leaked to the campaigns allegedly showed ten- to twenty-point leads for Mousavi a week before the election; earlier polls had them neck and neck, with Mousavi leading by one per cent, and Karroubi just behind. Historically, low turnout has always favored conservatives in Iranian elections, while high turnout favors reformers. That’s because Iran’s most reliable voters are those who believe in the system; those who are critical tend to be reluctant to participate. For this reason, in the last three elections, sixty-five per cent of voters have come from traditional, rural villages, which house just thirty-five per cent of the populace. If the current figures are to be believed, urban Iranians who voted for the reformist ex-president Mohammad Khatami in 1997 and 2001 have defected to Ahmadinejad in droves.

What is most shocking is not the fraud itself, but that it was brazen and entirely without pretext. The final figures put Mousavi’s vote below thirty-five per cent, and not because of a split among reformists; they have Karroubi pulling less than one per cent of the vote. To announce a result this improbable, and to do it while locking down the Interior Ministry, sending squads of Revolutionary Guards into the streets, blacking out internet and cell phone communication and shuttering the headquarters of the rival candidates, sends a chilling message to the people of Iran—not only that the Islamic Republic does not care about their votes, but that it does not fear their wrath. Iranians, including many of the original founders and staunch supporters of the revolution, are angry, and they will demonstrate. But they will be met with organized and merciless violence.
Already, Youtube clips are streaming out of Iran, many of them showing riot police savagely beating protestors.

...

That the reformists, who urged participation in the system in order to change it, have been so thoroughly shown up this June is depressing on many levels. For all its failings, the reform movement has been the most constructive and effective channel for Iranian frustrations and desires under the Islamic Republic. While Iranian opposition activists have fiercely debated the efficacy of voting—whether it provided a fig leaf for dictatorship or a necessary choice among evils—hardly anyone in Iran’s opposition wants a bloody uprising. That road has been too well traveled in Iran, and so the contemporary debate has been among nonviolent tactics, some with longer timelines than others. But now the regime has forced the issue, leaving Iranians who oppose strong-arm tactics and hard-line policies with just two cards in their hands. One is passivity, and the other is revolt. The outcome depends in part on how high a price the regime is willing to extract from its people.

In the days before the vote, my Iranian contacts breathlessly compared the atmosphere in Iran to that of 1979, the year of the Islamic Revolution. In the last twenty-four hours, the unavoidable analogy has become 1989. The big question is where we are: Wenceslas Square or Tiananmen.

So, to recap. Everyone knows it's a fraud. The people who counted the actual votes have said it's a fraud. Many of the senior clerics have declared it's a fraud. The military has pissed off the two candidates who got the most votes, by sidelining them (refusing to even give Karroubi more than 1 percent of the vote.) And there's rioting in the streets with brutal suppression taking place by security forces to keep them down.

It's kind of sadly amusing that if these idiots had played their cards right they wouldn't have this mess on their hands. It's a sad (or, conversely, a very good) day for the world when one of its biggest troublemakers has a GDP the size of Massachusetts and its corrupt politicians could be out done by Mayor Daley and Joe Kennedy.

[Pablo Sanchez]

The very incompetence of the fraud operation seems to support the suggestion that this was a palace coup by hard-line militia supporters of Ahmadinejad who were shocked by a thorough shit-kicking at the polls. If the establishment had been behind it, and had planned for this eventuality (as they should have!), they probably would have set up a near-tie and had Ahmadinejad win the second round, which would have been remotely believable. As it is, the official results are so obviously fraudulent, and the coup so open, that one wonders why they even bothered phonying up the final tally. Right now I think the government is banking that supporting Ahmadinejad will be the less problematic choice, because his supporters are probably more militant and better organized for violence, so they're dispatching the familiar Iranian riot containment method, which is flying columns of motorcycle-riding thugs.

However, given the alleged levels of support for the reformists this time around and how obviously outrageous the fraud is, it might not work. Instead of the protesters being a smaller and more easily marginalized section of the population, the majority of the country despises the election results. Even some of the people who voted for Ahmadinejad have to be given pause by the brazenness with which the election was stolen. The people actually doing the street fighting are probably going to be the same bunch as previously, but this time they have the moral backing of the whole country. Who knows where this might end up. I have to figure that the thieves are going to be reluctant to go all the way in quelling the riots, because any shooting incidents will remind Iranians of the 1978 Black Friday when the Shah's troops fired into the crowds.

[CJvR]

Well the only votes that really matters are those of the armed thugs and they have voted Amadjihadii.

Not surprising really, while Iran have held elections it is no more democratic than any other middle easter dictatorship.

Still it is rather surprising that after hiding for so long behind a tiny figleaf of democracy the Ayatollahs would shred it so blatantly in favor on naked force.
Bad planning or as some have pointed out a move made by only a faction within the Iranian power structure.

[The Original Nex]

Well the only votes that really matters are those of the armed thugs and they have voted Amadjihadii.

Not surprising really, while Iran have held elections it is no more democratic than any other middle easter dictatorship.

Still it is rather surprising that after hiding for so long behind a tiny figleaf of democracy the Ayatollahs would shred it so blatantly in favor on naked force.
Bad planning or as some have pointed out a move made by only a faction within the Iranian power structure.

Just to clarify, it's not clear that is was "the Ayatollahs" who organized this. Khamenei certainly gave it his ultimate blessing, but this is likely a result of militarist factions within the Iranian establishment. Several Ayatollahs have come out condemning the elections.

[Zac Naloen]

Whats seems to be becoming clear is that not all the Ayatollahs approve or are involved, some even voicing dissent and rejecting the legitimacy of the election.


Pablo, there is a video floating around youtube in which you can hear gun shots fired in Tehran, it's not clear who is doing this shooting or at what they are shooting.

[The Original Nex]

Pablo, there is a video floating around youtube in which you can hear gun shots fired in Tehran, it's not clear who is doing this shooting or at what they are shooting.

There are also unconfirmed reports of at least one protester having been shot dead.

[CJvR]

...there is a video floating around youtube in which you can hear gun shots fired in Tehran, it's not clear who is doing this shooting or at what they are shooting.

Im sure IRNA will report that it is just Amadjihadii supporters shooting in the air to celebrate their election victory.

No not all the Ayatollah seems to have been onboard for this one, intresting times in Iran. Intresting times.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Pablo, there is a video floating around youtube in which you can hear gun shots fired in Tehran, it's not clear who is doing this shooting or at what they are shooting.

Eh, it's an ongoing situation about which we can only get bits and pieces of information, but if there had been a major shooting incident we'd have heard about it already, because that kind of news spreads fast. It's probably warning shots, or militia and/or police firing at exceptional individuals, like if somebody tried to scale a security fence around a police station, or something. My point was, Black Friday is commonly regarded as the moment that irrevocably broke the Shah, because it totally alienated him. Of course, what we're talking about there is troops firing wildly into a crowd and killing dozens, so a few people getting popped here and there isn't the same thing.

[Straha]

As it is, the official results are so obviously fraudulent, and the coup so open, that one wonders why they even bothered phonying up the final tally.

Because Iran prides itself on being the only proper democracy in the Middle East. Can't have a proper democracy without a proper vote.

However, given the alleged levels of support for the reformists this time around and how obviously outrageous the fraud is, it might not work. Instead of the protesters being a smaller and more easily marginalized section of the population, the majority of the country despises the election results. Even some of the people who voted for Ahmadinejad have to be given pause by the brazenness with which the election was stolen. The people actually doing the street fighting are probably going to be the same bunch as previously, but this time they have the moral backing of the whole country. Who knows where this might end up. I have to figure that the thieves are going to be reluctant to go all the way in quelling the riots, because any shooting incidents will remind Iranians of the 1978 Black Friday when the Shah's troops fired into the crowds.

I disagree. The lesson the Pasdaran have learned over and over again is that if you crush protest right as it begins with massive, overwhelming force it wont go anywhere. They did it over and over again during the Iran-Iraq War, the Basij did it in the mid-90s when the Pasdaran told the government to change its tune, the Basij and Pasdaran did it during the protests in '99, and the lesson that everyone who looks at the Islamic Revolution seems to parrot is that if the Shah had marched the troops out in the streets '78 and forcibly shut down the revolution he would have survived.

The problem is three fold, I think.

First that the people have had months to build up to the level where a majority of the people want Mousavi, the minority want Karroubi and nobody wants Ahmadinejad. Unlike previous protests where it was only dissidents or liberals who wanted change, here hardline establishment figures have declared the election invalid. The lesson of the past is that you can crush revolutions at their beginning, but once the establishment supports the wind of change there's nothing you can do.

Second, I buy your idea of a palace coup but I don't think it was pre-planned at all. This entire thing stinks of amateurism and the Pasdaran and Basiij are many things but amateurs they are not. They've been involved with tipping and rigging elections all over the Middle East and in Iran. The idea that professionals like that would screw up this royally is absurd. Much more plausible, with consideration, is that a small group of Basiij or Pasdaran realized they were fucked and plans for a coup with no more of a plan then "takeover the Ministry of the Interior, and change the election tally." This would mean that wide swaths of the establishment military weren't in on the coup, and might even be against it. If true this completely changes the political topography because it might turn the fighting (eventually) into military vs. military.

Third, there's the issue of political legitimacy. Iran is the Islamic Republic of Iran. This coup sidesteps both the Republic and the Islamic (see the ayatollahs coming out against the election result) part of that. Now, it wouldn't surprise me if it came out later that a couple military figures went to Khameini and declared, point blank, "You support us here, now, or else we're not supporting you next time it gets rough." If the Clerics roll over it means that there's no legitimate government in Iran. This may not sound like much, but it's actually a rather big deal because all the major governmental departments, including the foreign office and the defense ministry, are run by the Supreme Leader, and thus (by extension) the Mullahs. If you run them over for this election then they're all become illegitimate, nobody will buy a word that Iran says if it doesn't come from the Pasdaran, and suddenly all the authority in Iran boils down to the barrel of their guns. I don't think that's a survivable situation, and I also don't think the Pasdaran think they can survive that situation either. That being said, the only way they can make their position look legitimate is if they crush all the protests now and make sure there's no serious protesting Monday and Tuesday (when people are supposed to take to the streets and then strike, respectively.) If they don't crush those, then they might as well call it a day and go back to the barracks.

[Straha]

Not surprising really, while Iran have held elections it is no more democratic than any other middle easter dictatorship.

Except, whenever the clerical establishment have tipped or nudged elections they've always done it via legal means. They get to control which candidates can run, and which cannot, and if their favorite horse loses, well... then they're stuck with a moderate who disagrees for them for a while (see Khatami.) This blatant naked show of force is not the clerics style and blatantly undermines everything they've said makes them the legitimate leaders of Iran. That's what makes this so surprising to me and makes me think it wasn't them behind it.

[Zac Naloen]

The BBC are not happy : -

Stop the blocking now

Post categories: BBC News website, World Service

Peter Horrocks | 14:03 PM, Sunday, 14 June 2009

BBC audiences in Iran, the Middle East and Europe may be experiencing disruption to their BBC TV or radio services today. That is because there is heavy electronic jamming of one of the satellites the BBC uses in the Middle East to broadcast the BBC Persian TV signal to Iran. Satellite technicians have traced that interference and it is coming from Iran. There has been intermittent interference from Iran since Friday but this is the heaviest yet.

It seems to be part of a pattern of behaviour by the Iranian authorities to limit the reporting of the aftermath of the disputed election. In Tehran John Simpson and his cameraman were briefly arrested after they had filmed the material for this piece.
And at least one news agency in Tehran has come under pressure not to distribute internationally any pictures it might have of demonstrations on the streets in Iran.

However, the availability of witness material from Iran is enabling international news organisations to be able to report the story. Viewers of BBC Persian TV have been in touch (in Farsi) sending videos, stills and providing personal accounts.

It is important that what is happening in Iran is reported to the world, but it is even more vital that citizens in Iran know what is happening. That is the role of the recently launched BBC Persian TV which is fulfilling a crucial role in being a free and impartial
source of information for many Iranians. Any attempt to block this channel is wrong and against international treaties on satellite communication. Whoever is attempting the blocking should stop it now.

[Straha]

That would explain why the BBC English site has rubbish coverage of this ordeal.