When I looked at Huffington Post this evening, I was surprised to see several items dated 2009-07-31. The first one I read was an article written by Abolhassan Bani-Sadr, the first president of Iraq after the Islamic Revolution, "Iran at the Crossroads of History: Will This Regime Fall like the Shah's". Among his points are that George W. Bush with his bellicosity strengthened the Iranian regime and Barack Obama with his wait and see weakened the regime. Dictators often depend on real or imagined threats to hold on to power. Another point is that as long as some leaders do not recognize the legitimacy of the coup, the people will continue their resistance and ultimately triumph. The White House's use of "elected leader" to describe Ahmadinejad is not supportive of that.
Another is "Happy Inauguration Day, Dr. Ahmadinejad: Don't Count on Success" by Jasheed K. Choksky. Choksky thinks that the regime is in turmoil and may hang on for a year or two, but it is facing so many divisions that there could be another revolution towards more democracy in a couple of years.
About the only current item I found was The Lede Blog of the New York Times, "Despite Protests, Ahmadinejad Consolidates Grip on Power". Contrary to the title, he may be creating more opposition from the conservatives because of his usurpation of power not given in the Iranian Constitution.
According to Robert Mackey, the editor of The Lede, he will be posting items early on Aug. 5 as he receives them. Aug 5. is the day that Ahmadinejad is supposedly to be confirmed for a second term by the Iranian Parliament.
Showing posts with label Iranian elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iranian elections. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
Friday, July 17, 2009
Geek or non-geek, some tips to help the Iranian people
See "How Geeks (and Non-Geeks) Can Help Iranians Online", Cyrus Farivar, Tehran Bureau, 2009-07-17
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
What can we do about Iran?
Not much.
Almost anything anybody does, whether it be politician, newscaster, or even blogger, is seen as foreign meddling. Of course, any regime that has officially-sanctioned human rights abuses considers any comment as interfering with internal affairs. In the case of Iran, they do have a bit more justification for paranoia given the long history of other nations directly interfering.
I had a scheme to cause a minor disruption in Iran. It was not something that would put the country in a snarl, but something that, if enough people participated, would be noticed by the government. But I thought better of it. It would be "foreign meddling" and could provoke a similar disruption in other countries.
Many people are holding solidarity demonstrations, both peaceful and violent. If people in Iran know about them, they may feel others are supporting them. However, isn't that kind of news being suppressed? Besides, how much have anti-US demonstrations changed American foreign policy, even when a large portion of Americans sympathize with the demonstrators?
There are three things that Americans can do.
First, write to the President, your Congressional representative, and your state's Senators supporting the measured response that the President has given.
Second, donate to human rights organizations that are following the situation.
Third, keep yourself informed of developments.
Fourth, drive less! I almost forgot this. Iran is one of the authoritarian petro states. Oil is propping them up. If oil use declines radically, these states will have less funding and become weaker. Because oil prices have dropped dramatically from their eyes, they already have some severe economic and political difficulties. Less oil consumption around the world makes these states even shakier.
Almost anything anybody does, whether it be politician, newscaster, or even blogger, is seen as foreign meddling. Of course, any regime that has officially-sanctioned human rights abuses considers any comment as interfering with internal affairs. In the case of Iran, they do have a bit more justification for paranoia given the long history of other nations directly interfering.
I had a scheme to cause a minor disruption in Iran. It was not something that would put the country in a snarl, but something that, if enough people participated, would be noticed by the government. But I thought better of it. It would be "foreign meddling" and could provoke a similar disruption in other countries.
Many people are holding solidarity demonstrations, both peaceful and violent. If people in Iran know about them, they may feel others are supporting them. However, isn't that kind of news being suppressed? Besides, how much have anti-US demonstrations changed American foreign policy, even when a large portion of Americans sympathize with the demonstrators?
There are three things that Americans can do.
First, write to the President, your Congressional representative, and your state's Senators supporting the measured response that the President has given.
Second, donate to human rights organizations that are following the situation.
Third, keep yourself informed of developments.
Fourth, drive less! I almost forgot this. Iran is one of the authoritarian petro states. Oil is propping them up. If oil use declines radically, these states will have less funding and become weaker. Because oil prices have dropped dramatically from their eyes, they already have some severe economic and political difficulties. Less oil consumption around the world makes these states even shakier.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)