There are two indisputable facts about the events in Tehran: 1) we are witnessing a Revolution, the country's second in 30 years; and 2) the election of President Barack Obama and his subsequent overtures to Iran are inextricably linked to the events. Let me address these two main points in more detail.
There are several reasons why I see the events in Tehran and other major cities in Iran (esp. Shiraz) as a Revolution:
a) the demands of the protesters have escalated from a simple demand for an investigation into the election, then to a recount, then to the election annulment, and finally, to the open challenge of the Supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei's authority. Yesterday's riots were a brazen defiance of the Ayatollah's demand that there would be no more riots and his coronation of Ahmedinejad as the winner of the election. As the Ayatollah is supposed to be a stand-in for the "hidden Imam,"--who according to Shi'a Islam is supposed to re-appear at any moment (something akin to Jewish' awaiting of the Messiah, or the Christian second coming of Christ)--the brave Iranians who took to the streets yesterday, with some shouting "death to Ayatollah," something that would have been unthinkable just a few months or even days ago, openly questioned the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic. We have to keep in mind that the Revolution of 1979 was an explosion of genuinely democratic energy and while eventually overtaken by the mullahs, led by the immensely charismatic Ayatollah Khomenei, the Islamic revolution promised to many of its detractors, including many Communists whom it initially brutally suppressed, that while Islamic, this indeed would be a democratic Republic. Elections, while not free according to our standards, were at least seen as expressions of popular will. No more. In what has become a profound seismic shock to the leadership of the Supreme leader, the people of Iran (at least a significant number of them) have challenged his interpretation of the election result. This in turn has shook the foundations of the mullahs' promise to the Iranians that the Islamic state would be a republic. If this promise is now seen as a sham, or a betrayal, then the whole consensus of the state has to be re-worked.
What we are seeing in the streets of Tehran is the unraveling of the consensus established not only by the Iranian Revolution of the 1979, but the brutal Iraq-Iran war of the early 1980s, about what Iran should look like as a state. Thus, the protesters' demands are no longer about the annulment of the election, but about the authority of the Supreme Leader and his Grand Council.
b) The other piece of evidence of a Revolution in the making is the broad support the Moussavi people seem to be enjoying. While initially a mostly urban, student-based movement, the enemies of Ahmedinejad seem to have grown in numbers and include many middle-class, lower middle-class people, including many housewives. The presence of thousands of conservatively dressed (in black hijab) middle-aged women on the streets of Tehran, with some of them goading the men to fight the police, is a truly remarkable development. The broad support for the Moussavi wing of the Iranian political elite is shown also by what it seems to be a growing rift within the cleric wing. Last night's arrest of Rafsanjani's--the richest and one of the most powerful men in Iran--relatives, who had been playing a prominent role in the background of the protests, shows the extent to which the Iranian clerical elite is divided.
2) Now to my second argument that the Revolution has something to do with Obama. While it is indisputable that the Revolution has more to do with the internal dynamics of the Iranian society (the disappointment with the policies of Ahmedinejad, crumbling economy, staggering unemployment, the proliferation of educated women demanding more freedoms, etc) it is also indisputable that most of these protesters are Internet-savy people who have, like the rest of us, been glued to the screens in following the election of Barack Obama. Obama's post-election statements, his speech to the Iranian people, and his more recent Cairo speech seems to have also split the Iranian political elite as to how to respond to Obama's message. Should they "unclench their fist," to use the parlance of the Obama administration, or should they follow the example of Ahmedinejad and keep "death to America" facade alive. The global reach of technology and the liberalization of the Iranian youth (who compose the majority of the Iranian society by the way) seems to have given the momentum to those like Moussavi who want to seize the opportunity and talk to Obama and the US. A sign of this is the fact that many protesters wave English-language symbols to theirs friends' Iphones which they later submit to the CNN newsroom.
What we are witnessing is truly historic, but as Thomas Friedman said in his op-ed this morning "we should have no illusions about the bullets and barrels they are up against."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment