Share

Walking Soft

by: William Rivers Pitt, t r u t h o u t | Columnist

Iranian exchange students outside Rome embassy.
Outside Iran's embassy in Rome, Iranian exchange students protest the election. (Photo: Dario Pignatelli / Reuters)

    A lot of different things have been happening in Iran over the last several days, some of them hopeful, some of them ominous, and most of them as opaque and inscrutable as the country itself. Ever since last weekend's election, hundreds of thousands of people have taken to the streets to protest the outcome of what is widely believed to have been a rigged vote. A portion of the masses have come out in support of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who was declared the winner after a highly suspect election process, while a majority of those in the streets have rallied behind the so-called "reformist" candidate, Mir Hussein Mousavi.

    What happened? According to Warren P. Strobel of McClatchy Newspapers:

There were scattered reports of opposition candidates' poll observers not being allowed into polling places, but no overt signs of voter intimidation or other troubles, in Tehran at least. What happened next is opaque. There were no international observers. None of the ballots have been seen publicly; they're under guard at the Interior Ministry in downtown Tehran, which is under Ahmadinejad's control.



By late Friday afternoon, the atmosphere in Tehran was beginning to change. Morning newspapers had carried news of "Operation Sovereignty," a police maneuver in Tehran that involved tens of thousands of police units. A reporter driving near the Interior Ministry at the time saw security presence being beefed up, as if the authorities expected trouble. According to a European diplomat, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to be candid, the Interior Ministry brought in loyalists from the provinces to tabulate the votes, furloughing its regular employees and locking them out of the building.


The diplomat's account couldn't be confirmed; a McClatchy request to speak with someone at Iran's Election Commission was turned down Monday, and the next day the government ordered foreign journalists in Iran on temporary visas to stay off the streets and prepare to leave the country. Aides to Mousavi, who have an obvious motive to say so, speculate that the votes may never have been counted at all. If they were, the handwritten ballots were tallied amazingly fast. Around the time the polls closed, state-run news media reported that Ahmadinejad had a commanding lead of almost 70 percent with slightly less than a fifth of the votes tabulated.

    At first, Ayatollah Khamenei raced out to bless the victory of Ahmadinejad and declare the election over, but when tens of thousands of Mousavi supporters roared into the streets, Khamenei was forced into a historic backpedal. "In a rare break from a long history of cautious moves," reported The New York Times on Monday, "he rushed to bless President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for winning the election, calling on Iranians to line up behind the incumbent even before the standard three days required to certify the results had passed. Then angry crowds swelled in cities around Iran, and he backpedaled, announcing Monday that the 12-member Council of Guardians, which vets elections and new laws, would investigate the vote. Few suggest yet that Ayatollah Khamenei's hold on power is at risk. But, analysts say, he has opened a serious fissure in the face of Islamic rule and one that may pro ve impossible to patch over, particularly given the fierce dispute over the election that has erupted amid the elite veterans of the 1979 revolution. Even his strong links to the powerful Revolutionary Guards - long his insurance policy - may not be decisive as the confrontation in Iran unfolds."

    A week has gone by and the issue remains in doubt. Few expect Mousavi's challenge to be effective, and it is generally believed Ahmadinejad will still be president once the tumult has died down. But a dramatic step forward has been taken by the majority of Iranians who chafe under the religious rule of Khamenei and the mullahs, and the outrage over the election results has opened a long-desired wedge Iranian progressives are using to pry some freedoms from the iron hands of the ruling elite.

    This is not a revolution, but a step, and a dramatic one at that. It is difficult, while watching these protean events unfold in the streets of Tehran, to avoid the conclusion that President Obama and his new efforts towards Mideast engagement have played at least some part in the changes that have been sweeping through the region.

    Ever since taking office, President Obama has been taking an active role in the Mideast, but in a completely different manner than his predecessor. Mr. Bush thought he could bring democracy and freedom to the region with troops, bombs and depleted uranium. He failed, and in spectacular fashion; the invasion of Iraq brought the election of Ahmadinejad, who has turned the Iran-US relationship into an even more dangerous and acrimonious affair. Bush's detachment from the Israel-Palestine peace process brought about two shooting wars in Lebanon. The list goes on.

    Obama, on the other hand, delivered a widely hailed address in Cairo, in which he reached out to the Muslim world without ever once using the words "terror" or "terrorist." He has told the bitter-enders on both sides of the Israel-Palestine conflict to sit down and shut up, bringing for the first time in a long while a real chance for a chance of some kind of resolution. And now, women and young people in Iran - who are the nation's majority, and who chafe at the box their religious and political leaders have put them in - are defying the Revolutionary Guard and the mullahs to demand in public that changes be made. At least to some small degree, given the retreat being beaten by the religious authorities in Iran, those changes have already come.

    In five months, the Obama administration's active and non-aggressive engagement has done more to stabilize, modernize and liberalize the Middle East than George W. Bush could have dreamed of in the eight years he spent tearing the region up. Nothing is settled, and much is still in serious doubt, but for the first time, real change is coming to that troubled part of the world without wholesale slaughter and mayhem riding sidecar.

    Another lesson learned in this brave new world.

Creative Commons License
This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.

  

»


William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times and internationally bestselling author of two books: "War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You to Know" and "The Greatest Sedition Is Silence." His newest book, "House of Ill Repute: Reflections on War, Lies, and America's Ravaged Reputation," is now available from PoliPointPress.

Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.

What about serious change in

What about serious change in the United States, Bill? I so admire the courage of the million in the streets of Teheran. Why aren't we in the streets of Washington demanding real regulation of banking and investment firms, health insurance, campaign finance reform, an end once and for all to Gitmo, cap and trade and a host of other new environmental protections and investigating and prosecuting the ugly history of the Bush-Cheney years? Why aren't you calling for that? What does it take to organize massive rallies? Write a how-to on that, please.

Usually, I agree with you,

Usually, I agree with you, William, but you're wrong when you say this isn't a revolution. If the people in the streets had dissipated after a day or two, it would've been a riot. But a week after the election, they're thronging the streets of Tehran in ever-greater numbers. That's not a riot. That's a revolution. It's just in the first stages. The next stage will come when the goons come out today or tomorrow and start cracking heads to enforce Khamenei's second "certification" of the election results.

It is most difficult to sit

It is most difficult to sit and read what is going on in Tehran, and not be a bit "ticked"... how can we comment and imply that the elections there were "fixed".. when that very thing happened in our own country in 2000 and 2004?? VERY frustrating... and "king" george (and his goons) caused it all.

Has anybody even considered

Has anybody even considered this whole Iranian revolution could be the work of western insiders and corporate controlled media? The Iranian protesters are holding signs written in English. Unless that is for a western audience I don't see the point. Why not protest in the language of your homeland? Haven't we thwarted Iranian governments like this twice in the past? This whole media blitz just smells of propaganda.

The French also ask why not

The French also ask why not here with great perplexity. The U.S. isn't into martyrdom the way one might expect of a country with so many Christians and Muslims. Our media hides stuff from a lot of people, but you can still find stuff out if you are motivated. The danger of cracking down on street protests in Iran is that even if local internet service is shut down and off-shore journalists are sent away, tyrants can't shut down Google Earth. While U.S. people appear to accept parades of coffins, it's not likely to be that tidy a deal in Tehran. Given the profiles of Iran's ruling mullahs, women haven't got as much to lose in Iran as women in the U.S. have. When people haven't got as much to lose, they are shovel-ready martyr-fodder. By reserving national wealth to themselves, the mullahs have taken more risk than our oligarchs. Looking at it from an omniscient point of view, maybe it required corruption as massive as that of Bush and Cheney so that the breadth of U.S. elite cruelty could no longer be hidden. The ideals of individual dignity and equality still have force of imagination, even if the world knows they no longer have much practical effect for ordinary U.S. people. I agree world leaders would rather hang with a smart, disciplined guy like Obama. But the U.S.'s clay feet are now clearly in evidence as well. With corruption ubiquitous, maybe others see themselves as more like George Washington crossing the Delaware. They don't see the U.S. as 2.5 in the suburbs, all hunky-dory. They're well aware how many U.S. people wanted to throw shoes too.

Obama-struck Pitt has

Obama-struck Pitt has forgotten that Iran is still battling American and Israeli-sponsored insurgencies on its soil. Soft power, indeed. This article is yet another exhibit to be entered into evidence under the heading "Obama and the Defanging of the Anti-War Movement."

"Mr. Bush thought he could

"Mr. Bush thought he could bring democracy and freedom to the region with troops, bombs and depleted uranium." How is this approach so different from Obama's bombs and depleted uranium? Iraq is still a nation in chaos and turmoil with bombings and killings happening regularly. Our military forces are ramping up in Afghanistan, and now Pakistan, deploying drone bombers operated from Nevada and continuing to inflict the civilian deaths and destruction decried by the author. How does The Obama policy differ from the Bush regime's policy? Obama is a better salesman, and a persuasive and polished orator. Other than that, the more things change the more they stay the same. Brave new world? I think not.

Yesterday's analysis by

Yesterday's analysis by Steve Weissman at least raised the question of how this is related to half a billion US dollars appropriated for destabilizing Iran, and yesterday's report by Dreyfus was a step beyond his usually very conventional reporting; but there is as Pitt points out so much we don't know, so many connections the media aren't making. Experience teaches that this is not accidental. There are so many dimensions that a good reporter would explore - if we could only figure out to hire and support a network of foreign correspondents. This story involves Iran's internal class and political conflicts, the reverberations of its revolution and counter-revolution, official and underground labor and peasant organizations, all disguised by religious rhetoric. Ad it involves global geopolitics and economics, the goals and actions of the US Empire and the internal politics of Washington, all disguised by cant about freedom and democracy. The events on the streets of Teheran are the tip of the iceberg.

Info on the astro-turf:

Info on the astro-turf: Here is a Ex-CIA analyst on CSPAN talking about his article: Ahmadinijhad won, get over it: http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2009/06/17/WJE/A/19881/Flynt+Leverett+Penn+State+University+International+Affairs+Professor.aspx Here is a blog article with a lot of information about Burston Marsteller's twitter campaigns: http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/burson-marstellers-twitter-campaigns-defined-by-burson-marsteller-and-their-tool-tru-cast/ And here is an article showing how the major twitter accounts talking about the "revolution" appear to be fakes associated with the JPost: http://www.chartingstocks.net/2009/06/proof-israeli-effort-to-destabilize-iran-via-twitter/ Bush was NEVER elected president, but we heard zero about that in the MSM. Anti-war protests get zero attention in the MSM. But we sure hear plenty about this CIA funded Twitter "rebellion" in Iran. American journalism is pretty worthless. Buy More! Save a Lot! Hurry while supplies last!

"It is difficult, while

"It is difficult, while watching these protean events unfold in the streets of Tehran, to avoid the conclusion that President Obama and his new efforts towards Mideast engagement have played at least some part in the changes that have been sweeping through the region." This quote reveals a typical American-centric, US is democracy's hero, attitude. I appreciate much of your work, Pitt, and this article was generally interesting (though like all news from Iran right now filled with hearsay, the only evidence we have), but this attitude, shared by all to many people in the US, must be challenged. This is Iranian democracy pouring through the streets of Tehran, not American.

Great article! The way the

Great article! The way the republicans and the media are fixating on Iran you would think the world revolves around Iran. The news about Iran keeps the American public from thinking about our own problems. It drives attention away from health care, the peace movement, torture investigations, etc. There is little we can do for the Iranian people but to hope justice will prevail their however unlikely. Americans need to ignore tv news and focus on our own problems. We should be demonstrating in the streets like the Iranian opposition. They take their civic responsibilities better than we do.

Have at it! Good for the

Have at it! Good for the protesters, where were ours in 2000 & 2004? We need to b u t t o u t. I just don't care, get us some job s already, Obama! What are you thinking????