The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    Michael Wolraich's picture

    Will Iran Be Next?

    By Michael Wolraich on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 1:25pm | World Affairs

    "The conspirators are nothing but corpses."

    -- Hossein Hamadani, Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Iran

    As Egypt glows bright and the media buzzes sunnily about the benevolent power of online social networks, anything seems possible.

    Today the world turns hopeful eyes to Iran as leaked cell-phone videos hint at massive protests in the streets of Tehran. "This may be the first spark of revolution in Iran," crowed the Jerusalem Post.

    But in these heady days of newfound freedom, it is worth recalling that Facebook did not invent popular uprisings against totalitarian regimes. They are as old as the French Revolution, and the past half-century has witnessed many citizens' revolts, some successful (Iran 1979, Philippines 1986, China 1989, Russia 1991, Indonesia 1998, Ukraine 2004), others not so much (Czechoslovakia 1968, China 1989, Iran 2009).

    While social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter have become valuable tools for protestors, they have not changed the core dynamics of the struggle between people and the tyrants who oppress them.

    There is one fundamental difference between the successful and unsuccessful uprisings of the past half-century: the military. In every case that army officers have sided with the protestors, the regime has fallen. In every case that the tanks have rolled, the regime has survived.

    My girlfriend grew up in Russia. While staying in the countryside in August 1991, she watched an ominous line of tanks roll down the highway. Soviet hardliners had taken over the government and declared a state of emergency. In Moscow, citizens crowded around the Russian Parliament to protect Boris Yeltsin from a tank battalion that had been ordered to arrest him. But the battalion commander declared his allegiance to the Parliament, and Yeltsin climbed atop a tank to address the crowd. The Soviet Union soon collapsed.

    But two years prior, China took the other path. The unknown student who stood defiantly before a line of tanks in Tiananmen Square delayed them only briefly. Protestors soon fled the square as soldiers started shooting. Chinese security services executed and imprisoned the leaders of the uprising. The Communist Party survived.

    In Egypt, the military leadership publicly expressed neutrality, but it did not remain aloof. When armed government thugs started shooting protestors in Tahrir Square, soldiers shot their machine guns into the air, and the thugs scattered. When President Mubarak refused to resign, the military at long last forced him out.

    When Ayatollah Khomeini battled the Iranian regime in 1979, the Supreme Military Council declared itself "neutral in the current political disputes" as soldiers defected in droves to Khomeini's side. But that did not happen in 2009. The Revolutionary Guards rounded up civilian organizers as armed government thugs attacked protestors with far greater ferocity than their Egyptian counterparts. One Guard commander who refused orders to suppress protestors was reportedly arrested. Iran's army is independent of the Revolutionary Guard, but it did not intervene. Without military force to protect protestors from violent suppression, the uprising collapsed.

    The protests unrolling today in Tehran may yet succeed where they failed two years ago, but they will only do so if the military powers in Iran turn against the regime. Without military support, we will see at best another failed uprising or at worst a bloody recreation of Tiananmen Square.

    Topics: 
    World Affairs

    Comments

    I wonder to what degree military training in authoritarian regimes includes training for scenarios where they'll be called on to fire on their fellow citizens. I've heard of desensitization techniques used in the US military to make it easier for our warfighters to shoot the "enemy", but it seems like it would take even more specialized training to generalize that training to include your fellow citizens, even after the regime tells you that they are "traitors".


    by Verified Atheist on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 1:40pm

    While the righteous soldier who refuses to shoot civilians presents a heroic image and notwithstanding my example from Russia, I imagine that the soldiers on the ground play very little role in the larger dynamic. None of the big uprisings have been determined by mutinies among the common soldiers whose role it is to carry out the actual violence. Rather, it's the officers, usually the top brass, who have decided whether to support the protests.

    Among the officers far from scene, I expect that their loyalty to the regime and their selfish evaluation of which side is better for their future play a larger role in the decision than moral principles, though it surely depends on the individual.


    by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 1:54pm

    their selfish evaluation of which side is better for their future play a larger role in the decision than moral principles

    <channeling spirit="Ayn Rand">What moral principles are there other than selfishness?</channeling>


    by Verified Atheist on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 1:57pm

    <curse target="Verified Atheist" intensity="9.0">Loathsome and contemptible spirit of Ayn Rand, begone from this blog!</curse>


    by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 2:43pm

    Just because…


    by Verified Atheist on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 3:53pm

    To a significant degree --- if they can do so anonymously.

    Georgian Riot Cops in Mickey Mouse Gas Masks

     


    by EmmaZahn on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 4:54pm

    I would be very surprised if Iran rose up in even a small percentage of what we saw in Egypt. There are still far to many Iranians who would rather give the west the finger and live under the mullahs than would want to do away with the current system.


    by cmaukonen on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 3:04pm

    I just am not prepared to jump up and down in joy.

    It is a coup d'etat.

    What is the population of Egypt and how many Egyptians were protesting?

    This will take time to settle out.

    Ten days to draft a constitution for chrissakes.

    Our nation took years and got it all wrong in the first draft!!


    by Richard Day on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 3:17pm

    I suspect the answer to your question is no. Iran is not Egypt, in three important ways:

    1. The Mubarak regime was near-universally hated. Even bureaucrats employed by it and businessmen who benefited from it understood how deeply, unchangably corrupt it was. Iran's ruling class is also pretty corrupt, and reformers have lots of sincere supporters, but so do Ahmedinejad and the religious elite. The split may be about 60-40, and I think that's in favor of the regime.

    2. Outside pressure: Egypt's government and military were U.S. allies, so they were somewhat attuned to western pressure. The opposite is true in Iran. The worst thing the State Department can to is to openly back the reformers, enabling the regime to brand the protestors as imperialist lackeys. And that goes double for the Israeli government, of course. Even people who want regime change are proud nationalists.

    3. The military: Egyptian troops stood neutral until they saw they had to act to preserve their own reputation and interests. If the Iranian military performs a similar calculation of where its interests lie, it will crush any budding revolution with as much brutality as necessary.

    Western pundits, analysts and experts believe Iran is as ripe for revolution as Egypt was. I think they're deluding themselves.


    by acanuck on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 4:34pm

    And (4) in Iran the regime can count on the highly trained and ideologically rabidly loyal Basij and Guardians of the Islamic Revolution. Lots or resources, brains, and no compunction about killing.

    All Mubarak had was a bunch of paid day-labor thugs.

    Really no comparison.


    by Obey on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 4:49pm

    Egypt and Iran are so different. I think in Egypt you have the classic revolutionary mix, dissatisfied, frustrated intellectuals and a middle class that is being proletarized, combined with masses of poor people and rising food prices. That is critical mass. I don't see all those planets aligned so neatly in Iran.


    by David Seaton on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 4:51pm

    Totally agree with you and Obey, David. And one other point, the U.S. isn't really egging on the Iranian protesters because it foresees them succeeding. It's trying to capitalize domestically on its support of the right side in Egypt, while further isolating the Iranian regime. Win-win, except for the people who take to the streets and get their heads bashed in. Remember the Shia revolt in Iran, folks.


    by acanuck on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 5:33pm

    Well, all I know is that Arianna thinks it's hot. Tongue out

    Screenshot of home page taken about 1/2 hr. ago

     


    by artappraiser on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 9:04pm

    Here's the interesting opinion of  a student activist at Amir Kabir University in Tehran,

    just posted by Arash Aramesh @ InsiderIran.org of The Century Foundation

    (hat tip for the link:Tehran Bureau @ PBS' Frontline):

    [....]

    Q: What is going to happen next?

    A: We don’t know. Moussavi was supposed to talk to BBC, but he is under house arrest. So is Karroubi. People need information but no one is adequately covering the events in Iran. Lots of people have good internet access at work and more people have basic internet at home. But there is not any information for them as what to do.

    I think people are waiting for another call to protest. People want to take advantage of internal rifts in government. The Majlis and the government cannot work together. They always insult each other. And people are fed up with this situation that nothing gets done and there is so much infighting. Everything is getting more expensive because of Ahmadinejad’s subsidy cuts. Metro tickets in Tehran are going to quadruple in price. People, especially the urban poor, cannot live like this. The same people who voted for him because of handouts are now getting tired of his policies.

    Q: What do you expect from Egyptian and Tunisian groups and pro-democracy forces?

    A: We want them to issue statements in support of our movement. Imagine what an impact it would have if the Muslim Brotherhood released a statement in our support. Or if Egyptian youth support us, there would be great moral boost.

    People don’t realize how tense the situation is in Tehran. It is very tense. It is a powder keg and only needs a trigger. People no longer consider themselves supporters of Moussavi or Karroubi. Instead, they say they are part of a movement. The Green Movement that does not belong to Moussavi but to the people.

    Thought it's not much to judge from, I found it interesting because to me it strongly suggested quite realistic expectations and not pie-in-the-sky-dreams about changing everything overnight.

    The first half of the short interview, at the link, is his/her descriptions regarding what happened today.


    by artappraiser on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 11:00pm

    Do you really take Arianne Huffington seriously?


    by David Seaton on Tue, 02/15/2011 - 12:16am

    Geez. No.

    I presume you placed your reply in the wrong place and meant it to go beneath my other comment. If not, I'd like to point out that the above citation has nothing to do with the Huffington Post.

    Kind of a bummer that I have to explain it t you but I put up that screenshot precisely I saw it as a blatant example of an editorializing tabloidy headline using point size. Adding insult to injlury, probably editorializing mainly for hits rather than any other reason.


    by artappraiser on Tue, 02/15/2011 - 7:42am

    I would love to see the disillusion of the Iranian regime for so many reasons, but the most prominent would be that it would show the right wing for the creepy Nixonian/Burcher mess that their foreign policy thought has become. Once freedom and democracy sets up shop in Iran, where can the arguments that a "new caliphate" is forming go from there?

    Beyond that, you have the potential for true hope despite bouts of extreme cynicism from the outside world. With the comparison of Egypt that you make, the difference there may lie in the fact that Egypt's authoritarian regime was one of strategic convenience for outside powers. It was really ego that kept Mubarak from openly resigning while, on the other hand, Iran is a very ideological state that uses ideology and outside forces (America especially) to make them acceptable to their people. 


    by Orion on Tue, 02/15/2011 - 1:36am

    It's been a century since there was even a weak caliph, and nobody in the Muslim world seems too upset. Osama bin Laden and his gang of malcontents are about the only persons pushing for a re-established caliphate. Sunni rulers reject the idea because it would dilute their temporal powers, and Shiites haven't been on board since the guy they call the prophet's rightful heir, Muhammad's son-in-law, was deposed and murdered. But trying telling that to the American right wing. Actually, try telling anything to the American right wing.


    by acanuck on Tue, 02/15/2011 - 2:36am

    I do buy, from my obsessive interest and reading on it since the 93 WTC bombing on the general topic, that the "Al Qaeda" et. al. message was quite attractive to many of what we are now calling the disillusioned Sunni youth masses. (A generalization, of course, but a useful one.) It played well with general hatred of American foreign policy choices, it even fit the cultural tendencies where they existed to conspiracy theory (themselves the result of dictatorship controlling information.) After all, they had no one else offering any answers to the whole humiliation problem.

    It is precisely the reason I am so very excited about the potential of these recent uprisings. They've finally got an alternative coming from the people themselves. Finally. It took some time but it finally happened and it's great news whatever the results. I feel its like the long nightmare is ending;  it's the coup de grace to the whole "Al Qaeda "message. Matter of fact I just can't wait for the next Zawahri missive, it's going to be fun to see him squirm. Especially since he was once a revolutionary Arab youth screaming in a courtroom in Egypt. Yes, new nightmares may develop, maybe are certain, but I feel at least we are at the end of this chapter of history. It gives me hope, no more "war of civilizations." At least not those civilizations.

    Edit to add:  a reminder that Khamenei is sitll making the caliphate argument. I find that intriguing, actually for the following reason.. I suspect there's no cynicism there, more like delusional thinking, that as Al Qaeda  et. al. is no longer a strong force, that these uprisings can be turned to the idea of a Shia caliphate, which the ayatollahs have never really given up on. Not the true believing ones, at least. As if the Sunni sect is showing signs of dying, i.e., going more secular is the same as dying, and they are left standing the one final truth and the light, they win, by Allah, that they are going to stick it out and win the caliphate prize.


    by artappraiser on Tue, 02/15/2011 - 8:12am

    Spot on. I spent a good chunk of time in Saudi Arabia and Jordan, and that was exactly the impression I got about popular sentiment and popular beliefs.

    Much like 9/11 was a game changer, so now 2/11 stands a good chance of changing the game once again, this time in a much more positive (fingers crossed) direction. There is going to have to be a radical rethink in how the US and the West generally deals with arab nations. Before dealing with these countries meant dealing, often sordid dealings, with their dictators. Now it will have to involve acknowledging the existence of ... the people in those countries.

    It's a tricky time for US diplomacy, and imho, from what I've seen from the State department (i.e. Clinton and Wisner) they have no clue how to grapple with this brave new world.

     


    by Obey on Tue, 02/15/2011 - 8:23am

    Good to have your input, especially given that you "spent a good chunk of time in Saudi Arabia and Jordan;" makes me feel that I myself am not getting totally delusional. Wink


    by artappraiser on Tue, 02/15/2011 - 9:24am

    I second Obey's "spot on." But I have not spent any good chunks of time in the mideast, so his first is worth a lot more than my second.


    by Michael Wolraich on Tue, 02/15/2011 - 11:53am

    I'd like to third what Obey said. 

    Obviously, however, Genghis' second is laughably wrong.


    by quinn esq on Tue, 02/15/2011 - 1:14pm

    Appraiser, I don't hear Khamenei calling for a caliphate. He's urging Egypt to adopt an Iranian-style Islamic state, but that's much different from a single political authority for all Muslim states.


    by acanuck on Tue, 02/15/2011 - 2:45pm

    I'm sorry if I didn't make it clear enough that that  part was my personal speculation. There is no quote by him using the word caliphate that I can provide, I was using that term symbolically.

    But my speculation is not just made up out of thin air. I have been regularly checking out Iran state media for a decade now, where the Supreme Leader's thoughts and pronouncements not coincidentally reign supreme, and I definitely see a narrative forming recently of a vision of a unified worldwide ummah against the Great Satan rest of the world.

    Khamenei in particular seems to interpreting all the recent news as all the Sunni having an "awakening" and finally following the true path of 1979 of the Persians rising up against the Great Satan west. I.E.(my version of what he's been saying):  finally, others are seeing our way was the true way; welcome to our vision of the ummah, brothers! oh joy, allah is finally going to get on with uniting the ummah into one world, in the way it was meant to be.

    I can't find where I read a more complete translation of  Feb. 4 Tehran University sermon, but it's summed up well enough here for general purposes:

    Iran's leader hails "Islamic" uprising in Arab world

    Feb. 4, 2010

    (Reuters) - Iran's supreme leader saluted on Friday what he termed an "Islamic liberation movement" in the Arab world, and advised the people of Egypt and Tunisia to unite around their religion and against the West....

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/04/idINIndia-54663220110204

    The theme is still a steady drumbeat that hasn't stopped and is still going on. And my speculation is being reinforced.

    Here is the big headline at state news site IRNA right now:

    Islamic vigilance caused Egypt uprising: Supreme Leader

    Tehran, Feb 16, IRNA -- Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said the recent popular uprising in Egypt is attributed to Islamic vigilance after so many years of humiliation of the civilized Egyptian nation.

    http://www.irna.ir/ENNewsShow.aspx?NID=30250451

    Here is the current headline at Ahlul Bayt News Agency:

    Imam Khamenei: West fearful of Islamic Revolution

    2011/02/16

    Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei says the West is concerned that the Islamic Revolution is served as a model for the region and the entire world.

    (Ahlul Bayt News Agency) - Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei says the West is concerned that the Islamic Revolution is served as a model for the region and the entire world.

    “Enemies are making efforts to prevent the Islamic Iran from serving as a model for Muslim nations in the region because public movements will be difficult without a model,” said Ayatollah Khamenei on Wednesday.

    The Leader added that the main reason behind the West pressure on the Islamic Republic is that Iran is promoting a model in the region and the globe, IRNA reported.

    “After the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, enemies have been making efforts to weaken the Islamic establishment through imposing various sanctions and the eight-year (Iraqi) imposed war, raising human rights issues and assassinating nuclear scientists,” Ayatollah Khamenei noted.

    However, their efforts failed and the Islamic Revolution will continue its path of progress day by day, he emphasized....

    http://abna.ir/data.asp?lang=3&id=226660

    And here is their report of a seminary cleric explaining the Supreme Leader's recent utterances to clerics nationwide:

    Prayer leader: "Clerics' play key role in Shia-Sunni unity"

    2011/02/16

    (Ahlul Bayt News Agency) - Prayer leader defined the important role of clerics in preventing sedition among Muslims, saying that religious figures play a key role in deepening Shia-Sunni unity by highlighting their common issues.

    ....Pointing to the remarkable fatwa of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Aytollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei he said,"Sacrilege of the Sunni sanctities is Haram (forbidden) from the view of Ayatollah Khamenei. Without doubt the achievement of these sacrileges is nothing but sedition and animosity between Shia and Sunni."

    This seminary professor added that, "Preventing difference between Muslims has always been highlighted by the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution because this difference ends in nothing but weakening of Muslim nation."

    Adding that this was the same reason why late founder of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Rouhollah Khomeini found the birth anniversary of the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and named it as the Unity Week in a bid to foil the plots of the arrogant powers and the western enemies of Islam.....

    http://abna.ir/data.asp?lang=3&id=226665

    All this unity talk hasn't been so popular in the past--sometimes, when politically expedient, Sunni were enemy (especially Al Qaeda types! They were always the enemy, with their sometimes attractive-to-the-unlearned counter-narrative heresy.) Not any more, all of sudden one "Muslim nation" is the message.

    The main takeaway to me so far is that I think he really believes what he's been saying. It's one of those vision things, it's not a cynical ploy for domestic reasons. I suspect he genuinely thinks all the Arab uprisings are a sign that the ummah is on a path towards being unified, eventually under one government. And that it is Iran that has shown the way and has been chosen as the favored model. It's not lies for political expediency about the Arab uprisings not just being on Iran's side but following Iran's model, it's sincere belief and excited belief at that.

    When I saw the parliament conservatives not just excitedly chanting for the deaths of Moussavi and Karroubi but citing them with the extremely serious label of “corrupts on earth,” it just added to my feeling that there is some serious religious vision stuff going on there.  They aren't just the enemies of the Iranian people, now, it's much bigger than that--the ummah is on the path to being unified and they are fighting allah's plans in that regard..


    by artappraiser on Wed, 02/16/2011 - 5:50pm

    Nature abhors a vacuum. So too does politics. Removal of Mubarak in Egypt created a vacuum so something is going to get sucked in to fill the void quickly. There's an extremely good chance the power brokers will win, with the approval of the military. I called it a St. Jude moment simply because the protesters didn't have a backup plan worked out to put in place if they succeeded. After all, it's kind of senseless to stage a revolt without giving thought to what you would fill the vacuum with, otherwise anyone with political or military power could steal the moment away from you. As it now stands, the power brokers from Mubarak's regime and outside influences, like the US and Europe, will steer the decision making process on the new government for Egypt and the public will be stuck between a rock and a hard place. A net zero gain which makes it a lost cause. The same can be said for all of the Middle East too. Toss out one despot and there's a dozen in waiting to step up and wrestle control. I have serious doubts democracy will find fertile ground in the Middle East.

    Here's a few articles that provides fuel for my melancholy take on Egypt's revolution:

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,745425,00.html

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,745674,00.html

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/egyptian-army-tries-to-break-...

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/02/14/108730/egypts-opposition-fights-it...

    http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/02/201121393446561799....


    by Beetlejuice on Tue, 02/15/2011 - 12:12pm

    Sorry, but I think you're missing the point, Bettlejuice.  The Revolution couldn't have a back-up plan, ready with alternate leadership, a constitution, whatever your 'adult' version might envision, because of one simple fact: it was a confluence of movements, ideals, anger, fear, frustration, economic realities and economic clashes within the Elites of nationalists v. Gamal-crony-capitalists, labor, rural farmers rising against feudalism, hunger, low wages, and TORTURE of political opponents to the regime.  It evolved, caught fire, transcended pragmatic differences, even within the military.

    Yep; there are sooo many things that can go wrong.  One of the sole elements of the side of Democracy is the huge spotlight Al Jazeera has provided (too bad we don't have one here), so maybe, just maybe, when things start to go wrong, the world can help.

    But please consider what has happened in the past to those who fought and made plans against this regime: they were imprisoned, executed, and/or were tortured.  Some of the activists in the Nile Way were in prison with this man; far more were executed.  Please think of that when you go on about 'no plans'.  And where the hell, by the way, is Al Baradei?  Doing interviews on the Sunday Talking Head Shows.

    http://www.newstatesman.com/middle-east/2011/02/egypt-brotherhood-uprising

    And by the by, there are plenty of folks who see more light at the end of the hard tunnel than you; Rashid Kahlidi (see interviews on Democracy now!) and many more.  I think predicting the worst outcomes just plays into the hands of those who spout Arab Exceptionalism.

    Thi9s administration was in the way for many days; now it may be calling the wrong shots in Iran, just to make up for it, and get Iran neutralized, since they have totally failed (their own fault) on having any meaningful negotiations with Iran over nukes (they just had to screw the deal Turkey was working on).

    Sorry, but your Stuff finally got my goat.


    by we are stardust on Tue, 02/15/2011 - 2:18pm

    Things are not looking good:

    Iranian lawmakers condemn protests; call for execution of leaders
    By the CNN Wire Staff
    February 15, 2011 9:19 a.m. EST

    Tehran, Iran (CNN) -- Iranian lawmakers denounced Monday's protests in Tehran and called for the execution of two opposition leaders for inciting the demonstrations, Iran's state-run Press TV reported Tuesday.

    Members of the Iranian parliament issued fiery chants against opposition leaders and former presidential candidates Mehdi Karrubi and Mir Hossein Moussavi.

    Press TV aired video Tuesday of lawmakers chanting "Moussavi, Karrubi ... execute them."

    Lawmakers also named former President Mohammad Khatami in some of the death chants....

    http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/02/15/iran.protests/

    BTW, CNN's Reza Sayah seem to be nearly the only rep of the western media actually in the country?

    More here, including video:

    Iranian MPs call for execution of Mousavi and Karroubi
    created 02/15/2011 - 17:50

    ....Around seventy members of Iran's parliament (Majlis) marched through the parliament’s main hall in front of Majlis speaker Ali Larijani, chanting “Death to Mousavi and Karroubi and Khatami” and “Mousavi and Karoubi must be executed.” The spectacle was shown live on Iran’s IRINN (Islamic Republic of Iran News Network)....

    http://en.irangreenvoice.com/article/2011/feb/15/2779

     


    by artappraiser on Tue, 02/15/2011 - 9:52am