Roger Cohen wrote a very interesting and surprising commentary on who wants to see an improvement in Iranian-American relations. See "Let the Usurpers Writhe", New York Times 2009-07-01. Apparently, those currently in government need an improvement in relations, but they don't want to see the opposition get credit for the improvement.
Cohen would very much like to see an improvement, but he believes that best way to bring down Ahmadinejad is for Obama to keep his distance.
My own view is that those who call for Obama to be more forceful are overly optimistic about U.S. power, military or diplomatic. Somehow they think when the so-called leader of the free world speaks, the whole world will jump. They neglect the long history of the U.S. telling some country to do this or that, and the U.S. gets just the opposite. The rulers, legitimate or otherwise, become more popular by their resistance to U.S. pressure.
Showing posts with label allegations of fraud. Show all posts
Showing posts with label allegations of fraud. Show all posts
Friday, July 03, 2009
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Did the Iranian government win the battle only to lose the war?
We lived in Stockholm, Sweden from 1970 to 1974. In our last year I remember seeing a demonstration of a couple hundred or more Iranians demonstrating against the Shah. The Shah did not abdicate until 1979. Iranians in Iran demonstrated this month in the thousands against the Iranian government. The government turned out in force and stopped the massive demonstrations. Did the government succeed or fail? Indications are that they may have failed; will it be weeks or years before the current government falls?
The streets of Tehran are calm and commutes take 15 minutes where they used to take 45. But business is way down, some shopkeepers report by more than half. People are afraid to go out. But they remember what they saw and will not forget.
“'People are depressed, and they feel they have been lied to, robbed of their right and now are being insulted,' said Nassim, a 56-year-old hairdresser. 'It is not just a lie; it’s a huge one. And it doesn’t end; they keep on insulting people’s intelligence with more lies on TV.'”
- "In Tehran, a Mood of Melancholy Descends", Nazila Fathi, New York Times,
"Instead, hard-liners around President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad opted for schism, a historic error. The Iran of yesterday is gone, the Iran of tomorrow not yet born."
- "Iran's Second Sex", Roger Cohen, New York Times, 2009-06-27.
If you haven't done so already, read Roger Cohen's reports from Tehran for the last several days.
The streets of Tehran are calm and commutes take 15 minutes where they used to take 45. But business is way down, some shopkeepers report by more than half. People are afraid to go out. But they remember what they saw and will not forget.
“'People are depressed, and they feel they have been lied to, robbed of their right and now are being insulted,' said Nassim, a 56-year-old hairdresser. 'It is not just a lie; it’s a huge one. And it doesn’t end; they keep on insulting people’s intelligence with more lies on TV.'”
- "In Tehran, a Mood of Melancholy Descends", Nazila Fathi, New York Times,
"Instead, hard-liners around President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad opted for schism, a historic error. The Iran of yesterday is gone, the Iran of tomorrow not yet born."
- "Iran's Second Sex", Roger Cohen, New York Times, 2009-06-27.
If you haven't done so already, read Roger Cohen's reports from Tehran for the last several days.
Friday, June 26, 2009
The quiet before the storm?
The mass protests in Iran have petered out in Iran because of overwhelming action by the security forces. Even protests made without crowds seem to have been feeble.
Yesterday was supposed to be a day of releasing green balloons. I wondered where the protesters would get enough balloons to fill the sky. Even if there had been enough green balloons in the stores, wouldn't the authorities rush to buy all the balloons?
Supposedly because protesters ran out of green balloons, they used trash bags instead. I knew they would never have enough helium; who stores a helium tank in their apartment? A quick Google search led me to the clue - hair dryers, and I didn't even have to read any full article.
Maybe the time it would take to fill a trash bag with sufficient hot air explains why the only pictures I saw of green balloons were of single groups of four or five bags tied together. Not a very massive demonstration. I was surprised that a trigger-happy Basij didn't shoot them down.
However, a couple of Iranians have been quoted as there is plenty of heat beneath the ashes. We haven't heard for several days about Rafsanjani's work behind the scenes with the Council of Experts, the group that can hire and fire the Supreme Leader. We have read that the mayor of Tehran thinks that people should be able to protest peacefully. We know that several clerics, including some very senior clerics, have spoken out against the clampdown. We know that many members of Parliament did not attend the congratulatory party for Ahmadinejad. What many of us didn't know is how much the security forces control so many aspects of Iranian society. But even in the security forces, not all agree with the necessity of the crackdown.
If there is indeed heat beneath the ashes, what, if any, fuel will start a new conflagration. The 1979 revolution took a year; the 2009 revolution could also.
Yesterday was supposed to be a day of releasing green balloons. I wondered where the protesters would get enough balloons to fill the sky. Even if there had been enough green balloons in the stores, wouldn't the authorities rush to buy all the balloons?
Supposedly because protesters ran out of green balloons, they used trash bags instead. I knew they would never have enough helium; who stores a helium tank in their apartment? A quick Google search led me to the clue - hair dryers, and I didn't even have to read any full article.
Maybe the time it would take to fill a trash bag with sufficient hot air explains why the only pictures I saw of green balloons were of single groups of four or five bags tied together. Not a very massive demonstration. I was surprised that a trigger-happy Basij didn't shoot them down.
However, a couple of Iranians have been quoted as there is plenty of heat beneath the ashes. We haven't heard for several days about Rafsanjani's work behind the scenes with the Council of Experts, the group that can hire and fire the Supreme Leader. We have read that the mayor of Tehran thinks that people should be able to protest peacefully. We know that several clerics, including some very senior clerics, have spoken out against the clampdown. We know that many members of Parliament did not attend the congratulatory party for Ahmadinejad. What many of us didn't know is how much the security forces control so many aspects of Iranian society. But even in the security forces, not all agree with the necessity of the crackdown.
If there is indeed heat beneath the ashes, what, if any, fuel will start a new conflagration. The 1979 revolution took a year; the 2009 revolution could also.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
An interesting non-violent counter-attack in Iran
If you have seen many of the pictures coming out of Iran, you may have seen a middle-aged man on the back of a motor-bike pulling a gun out of his belt. According to the Christian Science Monitor, he is a provocateur trying to increase the level of violence. See "Who's behind Iran violence? Website posts video in name-and-shame campaign".
An Iranian website has posted a few pictures of these provocateurs and some have been identified. People are surprised to learn that they are their neighbors. Supposedly one of the identified provocateurs has left town.
Many critics complain we have become beholden to our gadgets and our technology. But these gadgets and technologies are really giving power to the people. Power is held by the few when information is held only by the few.
An Iranian website has posted a few pictures of these provocateurs and some have been identified. People are surprised to learn that they are their neighbors. Supposedly one of the identified provocateurs has left town.
Many critics complain we have become beholden to our gadgets and our technology. But these gadgets and technologies are really giving power to the people. Power is held by the few when information is held only by the few.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Al-Jazeera more liberal than many think
Because Al-Jazeera broadcasts videos and other press releases from the likes of Al Qaeda, many Americans think of Al-Jazeera as nothing more than a mouthpiece for terrorists.
However, if you actually visit Al-Jazeera's web site you will find a much broader reportage. For example, see "Iranian writer on poll result", an interview with Azar Nafisi, author of "Reading Lolita in Tehran". Afisi doesn't pull any punches on what she thinks of the regime in Iran and of reactions to it. For example, "The US government is sometimes silly in its response to Iran."
Because I don't know Arabic, I can't say if this interview was also posted in Arabic. I can say if you click "Arabic" in the sidebar on the left, you will find many of the popular photos from Iran, including a demonstrator holding up a sign, "Where is my vote?"
I probably will not live to see it, but the 22nd century may see no dictatorships. Optimistic? Consider that in the 1950's Western Europe had Franco in power in Spain and Salazar in Portugal.
However, if you actually visit Al-Jazeera's web site you will find a much broader reportage. For example, see "Iranian writer on poll result", an interview with Azar Nafisi, author of "Reading Lolita in Tehran". Afisi doesn't pull any punches on what she thinks of the regime in Iran and of reactions to it. For example, "The US government is sometimes silly in its response to Iran."
Because I don't know Arabic, I can't say if this interview was also posted in Arabic. I can say if you click "Arabic" in the sidebar on the left, you will find many of the popular photos from Iran, including a demonstrator holding up a sign, "Where is my vote?"
I probably will not live to see it, but the 22nd century may see no dictatorships. Optimistic? Consider that in the 1950's Western Europe had Franco in power in Spain and Salazar in Portugal.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Many views on how to support the Iranian people
The comments on the Lede of the New York Times are all over the map: unquestioning support of the Iranian demonstrators, unquestioning support of the Iranian government, ignore the Iranians, stop the Iranian government, and more.
Those calling for no support believe that the Iranians are the enemy, government and people alike. This is the terrorist mindset: all of the X are the enemy, and so they all deserve to die.
The hard-nose cold warriors: they don't understand how foreign interference rallies people to support their government and backfires. Sen. John McCain faults President Obama for not doing enough. See "President Obama Reiterates Concerns about Iranian Election", New York Times, 2009-06-16. “He should speak out that this is a corrupt, flawed sham of an election,” Mr. McCain said in an interview on NBC’s “Today.” “The Iranian people have been deprived of their rights. We support them in their struggle against a repressive, oppressive regime.”
Boy, am I glad I voted for Obama! This is not the kind of talk we need coming from a President.
“We make sure that the world knows that America leads,” Mr. McCain said.
Wait a minute! If the Iranian election was corrupt and flawed, in what election was American chosen as a leader of the world?
There are the overly sympathetic meddlers: they call upon people to join a denial of service campaign against Iranian government sites. But denial of service on a few sites also reduces the available bandwidth in the local network and hinders outgoing messages. It is also stooping to the level of your opponent. In fact, one should avoid any Iranian site; the foreign traffic decreases the available bandwidth. Internet access in Iran has become very slow. Depend on non-Iranian sites to aggregate.
There is the reasoned approach: President Obama gave restrained support for people without undue criticism of the government. See the above article quoting John McCain. Also, note that Richard Lugar, Ind.-R, ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, agrees with Obama. “For the moment, our position is to allow the Iranians to work out their situation,” Mr. Lugar said in an interview Tuesday morning on CBS’ “Early Show.” “For us to become heavily involved in the election at this point is to give the clergy an opportunity to have an enemy and to use us, really, to retain their power.”
Those calling for no support believe that the Iranians are the enemy, government and people alike. This is the terrorist mindset: all of the X are the enemy, and so they all deserve to die.
The hard-nose cold warriors: they don't understand how foreign interference rallies people to support their government and backfires. Sen. John McCain faults President Obama for not doing enough. See "President Obama Reiterates Concerns about Iranian Election", New York Times, 2009-06-16. “He should speak out that this is a corrupt, flawed sham of an election,” Mr. McCain said in an interview on NBC’s “Today.” “The Iranian people have been deprived of their rights. We support them in their struggle against a repressive, oppressive regime.”
Boy, am I glad I voted for Obama! This is not the kind of talk we need coming from a President.
“We make sure that the world knows that America leads,” Mr. McCain said.
Wait a minute! If the Iranian election was corrupt and flawed, in what election was American chosen as a leader of the world?
There are the overly sympathetic meddlers: they call upon people to join a denial of service campaign against Iranian government sites. But denial of service on a few sites also reduces the available bandwidth in the local network and hinders outgoing messages. It is also stooping to the level of your opponent. In fact, one should avoid any Iranian site; the foreign traffic decreases the available bandwidth. Internet access in Iran has become very slow. Depend on non-Iranian sites to aggregate.
There is the reasoned approach: President Obama gave restrained support for people without undue criticism of the government. See the above article quoting John McCain. Also, note that Richard Lugar, Ind.-R, ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, agrees with Obama. “For the moment, our position is to allow the Iranians to work out their situation,” Mr. Lugar said in an interview Tuesday morning on CBS’ “Early Show.” “For us to become heavily involved in the election at this point is to give the clergy an opportunity to have an enemy and to use us, really, to retain their power.”
Whither Iran?
"Yet [Ayatollah Khameni] must have been troubled by a sense of déjà vu having lived to hear the calls of “God is Great” from Tehran rooftops denouncing his handpicked president. The same calls 30 years ago brought the shah’s regime to its knees."
- "A Middle Class Uprising", Abbas Amanat, New York Times, 2009-06-16, appended to an editorial "Where Will the Power Lie in Iran?"
Amanat also points out that 80% of Iran's population is urban or semi-urban. So much for the rural people were dominant in the election.
- "A Middle Class Uprising", Abbas Amanat, New York Times, 2009-06-16, appended to an editorial "Where Will the Power Lie in Iran?"
Amanat also points out that 80% of Iran's population is urban or semi-urban. So much for the rural people were dominant in the election.
Monday, June 15, 2009
The size of the crowds in Tehran is unbelievable
See http://www.flickr.com/photos/mousavi1388/sets/72157619701000269/ for photos posted by Moussavi1388. 1388 is the current year in the Iranian calendar.
Also a counterattack on Iranian government websites is underway. Two can play the game of web-blocking. Simply by requesting a web site, thousands of people can block that web site. Try Ahmadinejad's web site. Since there are more Iranian citizens upset with the election results than there are government employees who can block opposition web sites, the only government defense is to shut the web entirely. And that would upset lots of business people who have not been demonstrating. I think the strong-armers in the Iranian government have put themselves in a no-win situation.
I think we're going to see the Web as the biggest promoter of democracy that we've ever seen.
Also a counterattack on Iranian government websites is underway. Two can play the game of web-blocking. Simply by requesting a web site, thousands of people can block that web site. Try Ahmadinejad's web site. Since there are more Iranian citizens upset with the election results than there are government employees who can block opposition web sites, the only government defense is to shut the web entirely. And that would upset lots of business people who have not been demonstrating. I think the strong-armers in the Iranian government have put themselves in a no-win situation.
I think we're going to see the Web as the biggest promoter of democracy that we've ever seen.
Will Iranians bring democracy to the Middle East?
Many Americans think of Al-Jazeera as an anti-American, anti-Israeli broadcaster. However, you might want to take a look at one Al-Jazeera story on the crisis in Iran, "Iran protesters defy rally ban", Aljazeera.net, 2009-06-15. It is a rather even-handed reporting of the events and the conflicts in Iran.
When people in the other countries see footage and stories like this, will they starting asking why they shouldn't be doing likewise?
And it could spread out even wider. China Daily reportage seems on the surface to be pro-government, but those who read between the lines might see more. See "Iran's supreme leader warns against provocative behavior", China Daily, 2006-09-15
When people in the other countries see footage and stories like this, will they starting asking why they shouldn't be doing likewise?
And it could spread out even wider. China Daily reportage seems on the surface to be pro-government, but those who read between the lines might see more. See "Iran's supreme leader warns against provocative behavior", China Daily, 2006-09-15
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Is Tehran Bureau too popular or is it too accurate?
I tried to access Tehran Bureau's website and was diverted to its provider's error page:
Site Temporarily UnavailableIs the page too popular and has exceeded its bandwidth limit? Or is it too accurate and has been hacked again?
This website is currently experiencing technical difficulties. If you are the owner of this site, please contact us for more information. In most cases, this is only temporary.
If the Iranian election was fair, why is the government afraid of criticism?
The Lede and other sources are reporting cell phone service being turned on and off, text messaging being blocked, access to certain Iranian web sites being blocked, and even sites outside Iran being sabotaged.
One of these latter sites is Tehran Bureau. It was hacked but supposedly is back up. If it is up, it must be extremely popular. I can't access it. On one try it stood at "15 of 18 pages loaded" for several minutes. I retried it and after a long wait told that "Safari could not access the server."
The Iranian authorities are even closing news bureaus that one would assume would be "more friendly". The correspondent for Al-Arabiya in Tehran was told to close the bureau and not report any news.
Many in the U.S. felt that George W. Bush stole both the 2000 and 2004 elections. However, there was no wide-scale censorship of the voices expressing this opinion.
One of these latter sites is Tehran Bureau. It was hacked but supposedly is back up. If it is up, it must be extremely popular. I can't access it. On one try it stood at "15 of 18 pages loaded" for several minutes. I retried it and after a long wait told that "Safari could not access the server."
The Iranian authorities are even closing news bureaus that one would assume would be "more friendly". The correspondent for Al-Arabiya in Tehran was told to close the bureau and not report any news.
Many in the U.S. felt that George W. Bush stole both the 2000 and 2004 elections. However, there was no wide-scale censorship of the voices expressing this opinion.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
The fallacy of "both sides" continues
This morning's Star Tribune has a front page article titled "Both sides claim victory in Iran". The article is not available on the Star Tribune web site because it is a Washington Post story. In the Post it was titled "Iran Election in Dispute as 2 Candidates Claim Victory", Thomas Erdbrink, Washington Post Foreign Service, Tehran, 2009-06-13.
The Post headline is more accurate as there are definitely more than two sides in the Iran election conflict. The Star Tribune headline ignores that there were four candidates on the ballot and that many more candidates were rejected by Iran's Council of Guardians.
Although the Interior Ministry is under the President, do we really know that the President was responsible for how the vote was counted or miscounted? What if a faction of the Council of Guardians, the Assembly of Experts, or the Supreme Leader wanted Ahmadinejad to win, not so much that they agreed with him, but wanted to control him? Discounting the candidates who got few votes or those who rejected, the possibility that unelected powers have an interest gives us at least three sides.
If this third side was responsible for giving the vote to Ahmadinejad, would he not be somehow beholden to them? If so, would they reign in some of the behavior that embarrasses Iran's interest and get him to work more in the direction they want?
If my conjecture is right, the power brokers should be careful playing with tame bears. Sometimes they attack their handlers.
The Post headline is more accurate as there are definitely more than two sides in the Iran election conflict. The Star Tribune headline ignores that there were four candidates on the ballot and that many more candidates were rejected by Iran's Council of Guardians.
Although the Interior Ministry is under the President, do we really know that the President was responsible for how the vote was counted or miscounted? What if a faction of the Council of Guardians, the Assembly of Experts, or the Supreme Leader wanted Ahmadinejad to win, not so much that they agreed with him, but wanted to control him? Discounting the candidates who got few votes or those who rejected, the possibility that unelected powers have an interest gives us at least three sides.
If this third side was responsible for giving the vote to Ahmadinejad, would he not be somehow beholden to them? If so, would they reign in some of the behavior that embarrasses Iran's interest and get him to work more in the direction they want?
If my conjecture is right, the power brokers should be careful playing with tame bears. Sometimes they attack their handlers.
Trying to keep up with Iranian events
I've found that even if you thought you had read an article, it may have changed since you last read it. I found this to be true with "Ahmadinejad Re-Elected: Protests Flare", New York Times, 2009-06-13 or is it 2009-06-14? The New York Times already has the URL datelined for the Sunday edition.
One of the new to me things I found in edition I read shortly after 1600 was that many moderate clerics supported Moussavi. Many of these apparently think Ahmadinejad is a disgrace to Iran.
Also as you read more, you get certain information refined. Andrew Sullivan gives a more refined chart of the "straight-line" "results" of the Iranian election. See "The Results as They Came In", The Daily Dish. The web page I mentioned in "A winning election formula - Iranian style" used only four data points. The one that Sullivan used has six data points. Still the correlation of the reported data to the formula is still way to close to one for a person to believe the results weren't manufactured. Think how vote totals swing during U.S. elections.
One of the new to me things I found in edition I read shortly after 1600 was that many moderate clerics supported Moussavi. Many of these apparently think Ahmadinejad is a disgrace to Iran.
Also as you read more, you get certain information refined. Andrew Sullivan gives a more refined chart of the "straight-line" "results" of the Iranian election. See "The Results as They Came In", The Daily Dish. The web page I mentioned in "A winning election formula - Iranian style" used only four data points. The one that Sullivan used has six data points. Still the correlation of the reported data to the formula is still way to close to one for a person to believe the results weren't manufactured. Think how vote totals swing during U.S. elections.
A winning election formula - Iranian style
Remember how we used to be glued to our radios or TVs when some major awe-inspiring event occurred. We just had to get the latest development as soon as it was broadcast. Now here I sit glued to my computer picking up minute-by-minute developments in Iran. One advantage the web has over other media is the greater variety of sources.
One of the very interesting item is that one person has determined the formula for the Iranian vote results
Mousavi = 0.5238xAhmadinejad - 742642
It's bad enough that the vote tallies matched this formula at least four different points, but Mousavi started out with a negative vote of nearly 3/4 million before Ahmadinejad had any votes!
For more details, see "Faulty Election Data", Tehran Bureau, by MUHAMMAD SAHIMI in Los Angeles | 13 June 2009
One of the very interesting item is that one person has determined the formula for the Iranian vote results
Mousavi = 0.5238xAhmadinejad - 742642
It's bad enough that the vote tallies matched this formula at least four different points, but Mousavi started out with a negative vote of nearly 3/4 million before Ahmadinejad had any votes!
For more details, see "Faulty Election Data", Tehran Bureau, by MUHAMMAD SAHIMI in Los Angeles | 13 June 2009
Iran: Another "When will they ever learn?" state?
The results are in. Ahmadinejad was declared the winner. Moussavi supporter claim fraud and have taken to the streets. For ongoing reports, see "Landside or Fraud? The Debate Online Over Iran's Election Results".
Who is not learning?
Is it the Iranian people who claim fraud? Are they not learning that the people who support their candidate is not supported by the majority? Are they not learning that there is no point in voting because the elections are rigged?
Is it the Iranian government that has not been adept at showing transparency? Is it not learning that people won't more than a show of democracy? Has it forgotten the current government exists because thirty years ago the people got fed up with the Shah and contributed greatly to his downfall? Is it ignoring that the too many people may consider the current government as no better or even worse than the Shah?
Stay tuned to your news sources. Things may change rapidly. Even as I wrote this, two new entries were added to the above blog.
Who is not learning?
Is it the Iranian people who claim fraud? Are they not learning that the people who support their candidate is not supported by the majority? Are they not learning that there is no point in voting because the elections are rigged?
Is it the Iranian government that has not been adept at showing transparency? Is it not learning that people won't more than a show of democracy? Has it forgotten the current government exists because thirty years ago the people got fed up with the Shah and contributed greatly to his downfall? Is it ignoring that the too many people may consider the current government as no better or even worse than the Shah?
Stay tuned to your news sources. Things may change rapidly. Even as I wrote this, two new entries were added to the above blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)