ReportWire

Tag: Iranians

  • Iran’s Regime Is Unsustainable

    [ad_1]

    Politically, the regime has rotted from within, discarding, discrediting, or detaining its own kind. Ali Kadivar, a sociologist at Boston College and a fellow at the Harvard Radcliffe Institute, said that the turning point happened last Thursday, the beginning of the Iranian weekend and the sabbath, when vast crowds joined the protests. “That’s the point where people saw each other,” he told me. (Kadivar’s father, Mohsen, was an outspoken critic who was imprisoned at Evin Prison and now teaches at Duke University. His aunt, Jamileh, was a reformist Member of Parliament who was put on trial for attending a conference in Berlin and banned from running for a second term. She now lives in London.)

    The ideology invoked to justify Iran’s revolution has become increasingly untenable since the emergence of accusations of voter fraud in the 2009 election, which put a hard-liner in power, according to Charles Kurzman, a University of North Carolina sociologist and the author of “The Unthinkable Revolution in Iran.” Since then, “people just didn’t buy what a leader was saying anymore, and were looking for a way out,” he said. Iranians have occasionally rallied around reformist candidates, but they, too, have been undermined by hard-line revolutionary purists. “Many Iranians who share the ideals and goals of the reformist movement no longer believe that reform is going to lead to those goals,” Kurzman said.

    During an event at the Atlantic Council on Friday, Rob Macaire, a former British Ambassador to Iran, said that the regime in Tehran “does not have the answers to any of the challenges that it’s facing.” The inner circle of power has become “tighter and tighter,” so the government “finds it very difficult to do anything other than to circle the wagons and to double down on a repressive policy.” Guy Burgess, a sociologist who studies conflict and co-founded the blog Beyond Intractability, said that prospects of the Islamic regime collapsing have increased. “These are the sort of things that happen when, all of a sudden, people decide that the brutal force that kept the regime in power can be overcome.”

    But the Islamic Republic still has the forces—in the hundreds of thousands—to repress the current uprising. And it has been ruthless. Videos circulating online from one medical center showed a computer screen displaying digital images of the deceased in its morgue for families to identify. Other videos published on social media have shown the dead zipped up in black body bags, laid outdoors for families to claim. The BBC quoted Iranian medical staff who described people blinded by pellets, a tactic used by Egyptian security forces during the Arab Spring, in 2011.

    In the days, weeks, and months ahead, much will depend on sentiment within these security forces. In June of last year, Israel and the U.S. destroyed military installations and nuclear sites in Iran and killed key leaders and scientists, leaving the Iranian military feeling vulnerable. In addition, the rank and file share the same (increasingly existential) economic challenges faced by most Iranians. While the security forces are often lumped into an ideological monolith, there is a wide diversity among their members, as nearly all men are required to serve. Some opt to join the Revolutionary Guard because they get off earlier in the day than conventional soldiers, and thus can earn money at a second job. For others, having the I.R.G.C. on their résumés helps them later when applying for jobs in government or at government-funded universities.

    O’Donnell noted that a critical juncture in the fall of the Berlin Wall was when upper-level officials in East Germany were no longer assured that the Soviet Union had their backs. Mid-level officials, in turn, were no longer convinced that their superiors would protect them. “So then they started to ask questions whether they should fire on crowds or not and think to themselves, ‘I’m certainly not going to put my neck out if no one’s going to cover me,’ ” she said. Ultimately, the erosion of morale at mid-level positions was what ended Communist rule in East Germany. “It was very unexpected.” Burgess added, “Once you get to the point where some of the regime’s forces decide that they’d be better off siding with the uprising, then the regime collapses quickly, and you find guys like [the former Syrian President Bashar] al-Assad suddenly finding new housing in Russia.”

    [ad_2]

    Robin Wright

    Source link

  • The Bloody Lesson the Ayatollah Took from the Shah

    [ad_1]

    On November 6, 1978, while riots raged throughout Tehran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran, addressed the nation in a rhetoric of conciliation. “I have heard the voice of your revolution,” he said. The Shah promised to correct the regime’s mistakes, liberate political prisoners, call parliamentary elections, investigate the corruption in his midst, and ease the crackdown on dissent against a nationwide opposition.

    But, as had happened so often in the history of brittle regimes, the dictator’s gesture of conciliation was read as desperation. In a village outside Paris, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini consistently attacked the Shah with derision. The “despotic regime of the Shah” was weak, he had said earlier, and was “drawing its last breaths.” And now, despite the Shah’s speech in Tehran, there could be no compromise.

    Two months later, the Shah, suffering from cancer, fled Iran and commenced the indignity of travelling from one country to the next, looking for an acceptable place of exile. He died in July, 1980, in Cairo.

    The current leader of the Islamic regime, Khomeini’s successor, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is eighty-six. He is one of the longest-reigning dictators on the planet. He is keenly aware of the story of the decline and fall of the old regime. And now, with the Islamic Republic facing dramatic demonstrations in dozens of cities across Iran, Khamenei is faced with a dilemma not unlike the Shah’s. With the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and other instruments of force as his bludgeon, Khamenei has chosen bloodshed over conciliation. The regime’s attempt to shut down the internet and other means of communication has dramatically slowed reporting, yet human-rights groups say that Iranian authorities have already killed as many as two hundred demonstrators.

    “Unfortunately, if the Ayatollah is taking any lesson from the Shah, it’s that the Shah was weak and caved,” Scott Anderson, the author of “King of Kings,” a history of the revolution published last year, told me. “Brutally speaking, if the Shah had been tougher and had instructed his soldiers to indiscriminately kill people in the streets, he might have been saved. The question now is will the average soldier on the street shed more and more blood. How far will they go?”

    The leaders of the regime, various experts told me, derived dark instruction not only from their historical enemy, the Shah, but from subsequent history. In the late nineteen-eighties, the Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, tried to modernize his regime by democratizing the political system, ending censorship, easing the Cold War with the United States, and introducing market mechanisms into the economy. His conclusion was that “we cannot live this way any longer”; a regime guided by Communist ideology and confrontation had left the Soviet Union in a state of generalized poverty, isolation, and confrontation. And yet, although many conditions improved through Gorbachev’s liberal policies, he also risked the existence of a fragile system. Finally, he could not control the forces he had unleashed, and, by the end of 1991, the Soviet Union had collapsed and Gorbachev was forced from office.

    Khamenei came to power in 1989, at the peak of “Gorbymania.” The spectacle of the fall of the Soviet Union led him and the Iranian regime to grow more suspicious of the West and of any sign of internal reform. “I have now reached the conclusion that the United States has devised a comprehensive plan to subvert the system of the Islamic Republic,” Khamenei said in a speech to government officials, in July, 2000. “This plan is an imitation of the one that led to the collapse of the former Soviet Union. U.S. officials intend to carry out the same in Iran, and there are plentiful clues [evidencing this] in their selfish, often hasty remarks made during the past few years.”

    [ad_2]

    David Remnick

    Source link

  • What Makes the Iranian Protests Different This Time

    [ad_1]

    Previous protests were not as big there?

    No, not at all. And this is a huge blow to the regime because in Mashhad you see security forces in all corners of the city. Khamenei often gives speeches there laying out his plans for the next year. This is the last place that they would have imagined such a large-scale protest.

    The slogans are really important. In the last round of protests, in the previous round, the main slogan was “Woman, Life, Freedom.” It was coming from grassroots collectives of Kurdish women. Now we are hearing slogans about “death to the dictator,” which target the core of the regime. We have also never had such large-scale strikes. Strikes are something that had an important role in toppling the Pahlavi regime in 1979. And, in the previous round of protests, we saw that the Kurdish areas were very active in the strikes. Some activists were shouting that the rest of the country, including Tehran, should join their strikes, but it didn’t happen.

    This time, though, the unrest started in Ala’addin Bazaar—a well-known shopping center in Tehran, which primarily sells mobile phones and digital equipment—and it quickly spread to Tehran’s Grand Bazaar. The merchants in Ala’addin Bazaar are considered conservative, religiously speaking. They’ve never protested in the past. And this is a place for electronic equipment, mobile phones, computers—this is something about trading and being able to import and so forth. So it started in the heart of the capital, then it spread to other areas of Iran, and then seven major Kurdish parties basically came together and announced that they were joining the strike.

    You mentioned the Twelve-Day War with Israel. It was significant the degree to which Iran was humiliated by first Israel and then the United States, and the degree of military power that Israel seems to have displayed over Iran. I would imagine that just from a sheer nationalist perspective, anyone watching their own country get embarrassed like that would be outraged at the regime, too.

    I think we have to be very careful in addressing this question because I think there was a lot of misinterpretation in terms of how Iranians responded to the war. Iranians were obviously against the Israeli actions. The majority were enraged about this, but at the same time we have to be careful—when they’re enraged about an assault on Iranian soil, it’s not about defending the regime. This is about the population that is stuck between a murderous criminal mafia that has taken over the country and, on the other hand, Israel and the United States, who follow their own interests. So they’re not defending the regime by condemning Israel.

    Humiliation is something that we have to take into account. Many military commanders were killed. I think one of the things that people realized is that this regime is not even able to protect its own high-ranking officials. If they cannot protect their own officials and military bases, how are they going to protect the nation? How are they going to protect their own people? The leader of the country was hiding for twelve days. People were essentially left on their own to figure out how to defend themselves. People could not leave certain cities. They were blocked inside their cities without having any shelter to run into.

    So I think the war led to this complete lack of trust in the ability of the government to protect the nation, in the case of an invasion, under a regime that has been basically attacking Israel, attacking America, and isolating the whole nation in the name of national integrity. I’ve been hearing repeatedly, especially after the U.S. strikes and during the war, that people believe the nuclear program has caused more economic devastation and minor international isolation than any success it might have brought. The immense costs associated with the program have only worsened the economic situation, leading to a more stifling environment. Unlike the regime, the people do not view this as a national interest and are instead in favor of negotiating a deal with the U.S. to lift the sanctions. There have been negotiations and discussions within the government regarding this issue, but Khamenei does not seem willing to back down.

    What about Iran’s regional standing, which has weakened in the past couple of years after the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad fell and was replaced by a Sunni government, and after Hezbollah, the Iranian ally in Lebanon, was weakened by Israel? Is there some sense among the population that Iran’s regional position is weaker? Have you seen that fact manifesting itself in the way people within Iran are talking about politics and protest?

    I think it is part of that humiliation that we’ve been discussing, and I think a major aspect of it was all these empty gestures and speeches by Khamenei. He was always talking about the “axis of resistance” and the defenders of Haram, which is how he referred to the soldiers that he was sending to Syria to help the Assad regime. All of this is gone and all of it was gone in such a short period of time. And I think Khamenei did not really expect this level of assault and this level of loss on a regional level. On the other hand, I think what’s really important is to take into account the Iranian people’s grievances over this matter.

    One of the things that I hear a lot from people who are not even political, like just ordinary citizens, is that we are starving to death, so why is our money being sent to Hezbollah or to Hamas, for example. This financial support has been, by the way, openly announced. It’s not a secret. They’re sending money and they’re very open about it. They’re bluntly talking about financing the “axis of resistance” and not only financing it but also creating it—they were the ones who created it. And there has been mass dissatisfaction among the people who consider it a form of betrayal, putting them in a very precarious and fragile situation security-wise by exposing them to war and to invasion and to starvation and to sanctions.

    I also think something that we need to think about and to take into account is that Iran has been the sole major regional ally of Palestine. Since the beginning of the revolution, pro-Palestine rhetoric has been one of the pillars of the Islamic Republic’s identity, with talk that we are going to conquer Jerusalem, we are going to free Palestine. Ayatollah Khomeini used to say that the path to Jerusalem goes through Karbala. And that was the slogan for the Iran-Iraq War—this sort of expansionist idea of, O.K., we want to go to free Palestine and free Jerusalem. And I think what happened in Gaza over the past two years, as horrific as it was, and there is no doubt that it was a genocide—it weakened the position of the Islamic Republic, although the world and particularly some post-colonial sorts don’t want to accept that. And they’re keeping silent at this moment because they think that by weakening the Iranian regime, the situation in Palestine will get worse. But with what happened in Gaza I think the Islamic Republic proved that they can do nothing but create even more chaos in the region.

    [ad_2]

    Isaac Chotiner

    Source link

  • Britney Spears Issues Message Of Support For Iranian Women ‘Fighting For Freedom’

    Britney Spears Issues Message Of Support For Iranian Women ‘Fighting For Freedom’

    [ad_1]

    Britney Spears has voiced her support for protesters in Iran fighting for women’s rights.

    “Me & my husband stand with the people of Iran fighting for freedom,” she tweeted on Sunday.

    The pop star’s husband, Iranian-American model Sam Asghari, has been speaking out about the deadly demonstrations since last month, when Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old Iranian woman, died in the custody of morality police in Tehran. Amini was arrested for improperly wearing her hijab. According to witnesses, she was beaten severely by police upon her arrest.

    Her death sparked nationwide protests against the government and its authoritarian religious regime mandating strict dress codes for women. Human rights groups estimate more than 200 people have been killed in the demonstrations.

    “Me & My Queen stand with the people of Iran. Keep fighting,” Asghari wrote on Sunday, sharing his wife’s post.

    Last month, Asghari shared an impassioned message on Instagram about the protests, calling the Iranian government the “biggest terrorist for its own people.”

    “The biggest protest for basic human rights in Iran is happening as we speak. We’ve seen videos of people getting murdered and slaughtered on the streets, innocent people,” he said, urging followers to share what’s happening in the country.

    Widespread internet outages have made it difficult for protesters to communicate with the rest of the world, and Iranian authorities have detained dozens of journalists since the unrest began, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. Many protesters have begged social media users to spread the word about what’s going on in Iran.

    Spears married Asghari in June, around seven months after she was released from a conservatorship that put strict limits on her personal and financial freedoms for more than 13 years.

    [ad_2]

    Source link