Fighting for democracy

At this stage the issue is far beyond what the Islamic Republic could offer as an alternative

Share/Save/Bookmark

Fighting for democracy
by Abarmard
19-Jul-2009
 

The Islamic Republic core competency had been their ability to diffuse public anger through correct channels and create hope for a better system by reform. They were able to do so similarly to many developed countries by using their controlled media. During Khatami’s presidency, many newspapers began publication by criticizing the flaws of the system while promoting the ideologies of the Islamic Republic.  The Khatami experience should have been a lesson to the system that the Iranian people are ready for democracy and civil society that is based on the rule of law. Unfortunate for the Islamic Republic, many powerful figures did not understand the importance of reform, which in fact is the keynote in securing the Islamic Republic from any possible threats, internally or externally.

The backwardness of the conservative camp did not understand the logic behind the concept that with more relaxed laws the system would be more secure and the stability would result in a positive outcome for all sides. They began to close down many of the steam valves such as reformist newspapers. The system had cracked for the first time and the power started to shift to conservative corner yet the hope for reform was not stopped but rather became stronger.

The growing divide resulted to the recent election outburst. The people witnessed the powerless clergies against the unelected part of the system. The hope for reform was shattered in front of the eyes of the reformists and desperate voices changed to anger and frustration on the city streets.  

The greatest flaw of the Islamic Republic has been its intrusive nature towards the citizen’s private life and behavior.  People wanted to fix their governing body by bringing the most advance ideological figures that the system could offer to the front line of their battleground where the dilemma of modernity verses religion and traditions resided. The Islamic Republic showed its true face by bringing Basiji hooligans to beat and humiliate the most productive, passionate, and educated portion of the Iranian society. The solution would have been simple if there was no political coup in process.

Many guessed that the system would make a deal with the reformists and seal the security of the regime. Expectation was that Mr. Mousavi would come on TV and ask for public unity and peace. Yet Mr. Mousavi and his camp were not able to approach the Sepah and arrive to a conclusive assurance that the system is willing to share its power.  The ones, who were part of the problem, now became the hope and solution. One of such people was Mr. Rafsanjani.

In his recent Friday sermon, Mr. Rafsanjani clarified his dissatisfaction with the current path of the regime. His mistake was the advice verses the demand tone. This strategy was based on careful calculation to secure his position of power and leaving the fight for the people. Mr. Rafsanjani, who is one of the most powerful figures in the Islamic Republic establishment, could have assured the citizens that he would fight for the people’s Rights and would not sit quiet until all the demands of the reformists are met. Once people heard that the system is trying to fix itself, they would quiet down and allow the governing channels to fight themselves into a possible solution. On the contrary, Mr. Rafsanjani’s speech assured the reformists that he is another powerless clergy among the rest who are fighting to regain their power within the system. The Islamic Republic as we always knew it does not exist and the pieces are changing fast.

If the system continues on its current path of humiliating the free minded and modern citizens, then the possibilities of a more open, less intrusive and democratic Iran will instead give room to a more invasive, dictatorial and heavily censored media. This would be a natural path since the government would not be able to answer a large portion of its society’s demands. Naturally, the underground press, anti system organizations and oppositions would blossom. One would expect the end of the system in the long run. The mistake that the Islamic Republic’s Sepah has done is the miscalculation that did not consider the people factor. If they do not change their behavior, which is very likely, then their end is around the corner as the reformists have warned (eversince Khatami’s presidency).

At this stage the issue is far beyond what the Islamic Republic could offer as an alternative and the people are uniting day by day for the goal of achieving the Iranian dream of freedom, independence and democracy.

Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by AbarmardCommentsDate
خواست
-
Oct 23, 2012
پیوند ساقه ها
5
Jul 26, 2012
رويای پرواز
14
Jan 24, 2012
more from Abarmard
 
Anonymouse

Ahmadi was 3rd when

by Anonymouse on

Ahmadi was 3rd when they panicked and gave him the election. If he had won the majority (BTW what is this with majority and not 63%, semi-pregnant?! ;-) or 63% why wouldn't they just recount like a baby human and boast and celebrate their victory?  Why wall to wall blockade of media, killings and beatings? What kind of recount is that when they recount 10% and of that 10% they find 150 polling stations in jeapordy?

Ahmadi did not win.  If he had won "the majority" who voted for him would be pouring in the streets. This thing about Mousavi calling for his own early election victory is hocus pocus.  He is accused of a lot of other things too.  Add this to the list. 

Everything is sacred.


Abarmard

Mousavi was sure he won

by Abarmard on

Because of the turn out. I believe that Ahmadinejad won the majority, but not 63%.


Dariush

"As Paul Craig Roberts has

by Dariush on

"As Paul Craig Roberts has observed, “Mousavi declared his victory several hours before the polls closed. This is classic CIA destabilization designed to discredit a contrary outcome. It forces an early declaration of the vote.” 

"When Iran declared the results of the election early, the charge was made that “the outcome was declared too soon after the polls closed for all the votes to have been counted”.

 

Also, when I read that Mousavi has declared victory way before Ahmadinejad does and then claimed that the outcome of Ahmadinejad's victory was declared too soon, made me wonder, how could Mousavi's victory claim be true even hours before Ahmadinejad's claim of victory. If Ahmadinejad's results was too soon, Musavi's results was even much too sooner.

Then I added the % of the votes for each candidate and came to be more than 100% , then I knew that they are both full of it.

Regardless, all it would take was a recount, but that obviously wouldn't have benefited Ahmadinejad.

 

 

 


Truth Seeker

There is more to it...

by Truth Seeker on


Abarmard

Dariush

by Abarmard on

Interesting points. Thanks

I also think the big loser will be Khamenei, as he has no support within most clergies, politicians, and people. Once the Sepah is done with this strategy, they can kick his behind easily out of their way. On the other hand why should they?

Sepah is it.


Dariush

I read the article that

by Dariush on

I read the article that Truth Seeker attached about Paul Craig Roberts.  It is interesting how his analysis are so close to mine with the exception that I also mentioned, that the public will be used to serve as the foot soldiers for the enemy in case of any attacks. Some said, "the conspiracy theory still exist in Dariush's mind."  I guess now coming from Paul Roberts, it is more acceptable.

There are different phases in a plan. Change through chaos and disorder is the phase one of the plan. If this fails, then comes plan B and C.

There is another point that people are missing.  Rafsanjani is in the most wanted list accused of the bombing of a Jewish center in Argentina. He cannot leave Iran.  If he does, he will be arrested. Otherwise he would have been gone already. Therefor he has two options.  1- Make a deal with Khamenei/Ahmadinejad and I think Ahmadinejad will not make such a deal. 2- Fight them using the opposition and people , this not only increases his success, it will probably remove his name from the most wanted list and gives him a safe place out of Iran in case the opposition fails to topple Ahmadinejad.

Again. the government have brought this upon themselves by making the worst decisions with respect to the election and demonstrations.  Even with the rigging, if Ahmadinejad had ordered the release of all or most of the political prisoners, people would have been hopeful and then by extending freedom of speech, human rights and justice, he would have change the course of the history for Iran and themselves. But unfortunately, none of the above was a priority for Khamenei, Ahmadinejad and some others in the system.

 


Abarmard

KouroshS

by Abarmard on

Yes Kourosh, I find change from within the least costly. Still am for that, but not changing backward.

As long as a system shows positive signs forward and more openness, then there is no reason to overthrow it. This is not the case now.


default

The system... abarmard

by KouroshS on

Of course could do a lot of things or rather could have and should have done so much, but they chose not to simply because the will is not there.

It was a radical change since you were always for the change from within.


Abarmard

KouroshS

by Abarmard on

Not a radical jump, just a sudden change of events.

You could be correct, I can't argue my case since at this point anything goes.

The system could try to assimilate the opposition and seal the deal. I highly doubt it. Knowing the stubborn part of the system that now holds the power...

I do not have the answers. The way things are going, I do see a formation of a revolution.

Initially the system had hundreds of choices, then tens and now less than a handful. Time is ticking.


default

commenters

by KouroshS on

Fozul bashi

Really? So your suggestion is to not let the original goals be redifined from 30 years ago, and let's also not get in the way of the hardliners and let them hang on to power as long as they can... And that will be the formula that "can" bring iran freedom and democracy?

 

Abarmard

A very radical jump from what you have always believed. This regime will jump at any chance and/or excuse to inflict pain on people. You witnessed what had happened before even rafsanjani took to the podium and express his resentment. What do you think will happen if he is more adamant and becomes more stern in making demands of Khamenei.? who do you think will really pay the price and face the consequences? The people.

Ananymouse

It is never too soon to dismiss mousavi. People voted because they had no other option and if you look at the majority of the voters. it was all the young voters who voted for him and those who wanted the IRI gone, did not bother showing up at the Voting booths. BTW  What has mousavi delivered so far and what can he deliver?? Have you not seen enough to let you know that there is nothing that he can do on his own without interference from above?

 

 


Anonymouse

Abarmard jaan (may

by Anonymouse on

Abarmard jaan (may your headaches and problems falls smack right down the middle of your ill wishers' heads :-) demonstrators wanted Rafsanjani to demand something from Khamenei? How can he demand something when the protestors will not be not happy with either green or black party?  When did green and black party happen that we missed it?

I think we need to first acknowledge the green movement which was born out of the 2009 election.  The demands of the protestors was not total regime change because they voted.  The regime's response may have driven many in that direction but that does not mean Mousavi has not delivered or can not deliver.  It is too soon to dismiss Mousavi unless you dismissed him before the election.

If you dismissed Mousavi before the election then you're not aligned with protestors who voted for Mousavi because they thought they thought he could deliver something.  What has Mousavi done since to constitue his turning back on people who voted for him?  This whole thing for the time being is to let Mousavi deliver.  What was he or is he supposed to deliver?  Nothing?

It is never fun and humbling to say "I told you so".  So let's put things in perspective and give everyone their due.

Everything is sacred.


Abarmard

Dear Anonymouse

by Abarmard on

I believe it would have made a difference in the mind of many (certainly not all) of the demonstrators.

The regime is fighting among itself. If the fighting is based on two powerful bodies, then the people would step back and wait for the results. In this case, the opposing side showed weakness and threw the ball back at the people. In a way, Rafsanjani wanted the crowd to continue their presence on the streets.

The people (those who are pouring on streets) will not be happy with either green party or black. They want deep changes within the system that Rafsanjani or Mousavi would not be able to deliver. Fight among two powerful forces within the system, would allow the people to gain higher advantage in the long run.

In this case, it's those people who are dissatisfied vs the regime. Since this is a civil rights movement rather than revolutionary, the regime is missing the beat by far (by not addressing the real issues). This is where I come to the conclusion that the next step would be overthrow all together. We are still not there.

Future, obviously, is any body's guess.


Anonymouse

Rafsanjani

by Anonymouse on

Abarmard had Rafsanjani "demanded" rather than given "advice" would it have made any difference?

Rafsanjani is like a Piñata that everyone wants to take a shot at and he knows it.  So far in this crisis he has played a good role for the green movement.  From his letter to Khamenei prior to election to last Friday's prayer in contrast to Khamenei's sermon.

We don't want the movement to flounder, rather gain more support and prominence.  Ahmadi made a living out of poking Rafsanjani in 2005 and 2009.  Some people (not you) who are allergic to Ahmadi and require mouth guard to protect their teeth from any further uncontainable grinding, find themselves in the same position as Ahmadi and then they ridicule others for finding themselves in the same camp.

Everything is sacred.


cyclicforward

Truth Seeker

by cyclicforward on

The article that you pointed out could be truth or not. The main fact however is that the IRI took arm and killed innocent civilians. They did not listen to the opposition and their reasons. On top of that for the last thirty years this government has been abusing the Iranians and everyone just about had it. 

If you want the people to support you in case of a war, you would better treat them right so they will help you. In Iran, no one wants to see this government any more and they may pay any price at this point.


Truth Seeker

Wake up Iranians

by Truth Seeker on

Wake up stop being manipulated by Rafsanjani's Mafia

//www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2009/07/20/in-...


Fouzul Bashi

Great analysis

by Fouzul Bashi on

I totally agree with your conclusion. The reformists were trying to save the "islamic revolution" by making it more tolerant of the diversities in Iran society and maybe to achieve this by the minimum bloodshed and avoiding a civil war. The hardliners are not showing any leniency and are hanging on to the power with all their might which can result in a free and democratic Iran eventually, but only if the goals of this uprising are not redefined again after the people's victory like they were 30 years ago.


Fred

Not a nonfiction

by Fred on

When you open with this statement: 

 “The Islamic Republic core competency had been their ability to diffuse public anger through correct channels and create hope for a better system by reform.

 One has to stop reading further, rub the eyes, take a deep breath and then drudge through the rest. By the time the mishmash gets to this passage:    

 

“If the system continues on its current path of humiliating the free minded and modern citizens, then the possibilities of a more open, less intrusive and democratic Iran will instead give room to a more invasive, dictatorial and heavily censored media.”  

 

 

All of the sudden the task becomes easier for one know the article is in fact a work of fiction and not a nonfiction.