The Real Race for Iran

Human rights vs. Tehran's defenders

Share/Save/Bookmark

The Real Race for Iran
by Josh Shahryar
28-Jun-2010
 

Since Iran was thrust into internal turmoil by last year's election, the world has been moved by events that unfolded during the protests of the Green Movement. As we watched the violence of the agents of the Iranian government against peaceful demonstrators, most of us thought that it would be impossible to defend the regime's position amidst the bloodshed we witnessed on our TV screens.

Not so. The Iranian Government, despite all the detentions, abuses, and unlawful killings since June 2009, still has support overseas in the guise of purportedly unbiased political analysts, none more vocal than that of the authors of Race for Iran, one a former CIA and National Security Council official, the other a former diplomat in the State Department.

Their solution to the human rights abuse issue? Pretend it is not relevant. Arrests, torture, rape, and the murder of protesters are set aside.

The testament to how far they can go in defending an indefensible position? Consider the lengthy response of RFI's authors to "Misreading Tehran", a series of seven articles published on the Foreign Policy website.

In this article, the duo close their eyes to all other internal matter to declare that the 2009 Presidential election is legitimate, simply because the opposition has allegedly not provided any evidence to back up claims of fraud. Thus, the vote for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad must be free and fair.

If we were to accept this argument, then every election under Suharto in Indonesia was free and fair. Every election held in Islam Karimov's Uzbekistan is free, as is every vote held in Cuba under Fidel Castro. Robert Mugabe is the rightful ruler of Zimbabwe. If stolen or "created" ballots cannot be exhibited, the result is not only legal but legitimate.

Under this "legitimate" Iranian Government, freedom of speech is severely curtailed. Newspapers are regularly banned, journalists regularly imprisoned. Candidates for elections are screened by the establishment, and only those passing the Guardian Council's ideological tests are allowed to run. There are hundreds -- perhaps thousands -- of political prisoners suffering in Iran's jails. Under such harsh conditions, it is a distortion -- a dishonorable distortion -- to say that elections in Iran can be free, fair and honest.

If that were not enough, high-ranking clerics -- from within Iran's own establishment -- came forward and decried the elections as fraudulent. Grand Ayatollah Bayat-Zanjani was quoted, "Every healthy mind casts doubt on the way the election was held." Ayatollah Jalaleddin Taheri called the re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad "illegitimate" and "tyrannical." Perhaps the most revered cleric after Khamenei, Grand Ayatollah Lotfullah Safi Golpayegani called the results "a grand lie." Their voices were silenced by the media blackout, with Western journalists unaware of their clout within Iran's government and society.

But to RFI's authors, it is beyond consideration that Iran's leadership is a brutal regime hell-bent on keeping itself in power. They dismiss that people from within Iran's establishment question the legitimacy of the election. To them, an inquiry can only be considered if the Green Movement takes up arms, fights the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, confiscates all the ballot boxes from the election through force of arms and then counts them somewhere in Europe in front of international media. Only then, will 'healthy" minds accept fraud.

Yet there is a somewhat tortured twist in RFI's line, illustrated in the article in Foreign Policy. Having declared -- following the sudden execution of five Iranians on 9 May -- that the consideration of human rights was beyond their agenda, the authors resurrect two months-old "studies" of the 2009 election to establish that the political and civil rights of Iranians were respected and defended.

Doing so, they hold up a cracked mirror with RFI's reflection of post-election Iran: one of the purported reports on the election is by little-known "analysts" who have also suggested that Neda Agha Soltan, killed during the protests of 20 June 2009, was slain by agents of "the West":

It is inconceivable that an Islamic regime which understands the power of martyrdom in its own culture would sanction the cold-blooded murder of an innocent and ordinary young woman on the streets of Tehran. However it is every bit conceivable that those who thought the opposition movement needed a symbol and icon of resistance -- recipients and supporters no doubt of a $400m CIA-backed destabilization program for Iran -- would have arranged this horrible murder and try and pin it on the Iranian authorities.)

If RFI's authors claim that rights have no place in their forum, why resurrect a long-surpassed and rather creaky case for a proper vote on 12 June 2009?

In part, it is a necessary tactic to support the authors' main objective, which is to promote US-Iran discussions on important regional and global issues. Putting forth that case requires the notion that President Ahmadinejad can be engaged because he has a legitimate position.

More importantly, though, the tactic is a deflection. The Green Movement and civil rights organizations inside Iran long ago moved beyond contesting the elections to the campaign for a political, social, economic, and religious system that upholds rather than abuses its citizens' rights. Mir Hossein Mousavi has released several statements in recent months emphasizing that the Green Movement needs to firm up its ties with the Iranian populace to spread the message of change and to ensure that the Islamic Republic fulfills the rights set out in its Constitution.

Iran's Government is unable to address these issues, but they are also unable to prevent their consideration. It has persisted in arresting people who protest brutality and human rights abuses, but the challenge continues. It has tried to penetrate the ranks of the Green Movement, but it cannot prevent activists from interacting with disgruntled Iranians who have been affected. It has pursued the alternative of proclaiming Iran's exalted international position, but that distraction cannot be sustained when headlines are re-claimed by the heckling of Ayatollah Khomeini's grandson and the attacks on Iran's most esteemed clerics.

So the solution is sought by Tehran's defenders: while announcing that rights do not matter, revive the notion of the "legitimate" rule -- with the implication that legitimacy confers the authority to pursue any and all acts in the name of the Iranian state -- established by the 2009 election.

The problem for this defense is that rights will not go away. Those who bravely persist in the face of repression are emphasizing human rights and democracy more than ever. Ten days ago, Iranians who marched in Tehran were not heard chanting, "Where is My Vote?"; amidst the calls of God is Great, they were demanding that their rights -- as Iranians and as human beings -- be affirmed by their Government and by their Supreme Leader.

An objective analysis worthy of the label would question why the Iranian government fills the countries streets with security forces if it is stable and loved by its people. It would investigate why foreign media is effectively banned and why dozens of Iran's journalists are in jail, barred from working, or under threat of punishment if they dare to write. It would at least raise a quizzical eyebrow at the scores who are on death row and the hundreds more behind bars or on heavy bail simply because they voiced their opposition to the regime.

But that analysis would be tantamount to a questioning of legitimacy. And there the authors of RFI meet their self-imposed limit. They have shackled themselves even more effectively than the Government which they defend has shackled its people.

If there is a Race for Iran, those who defend the regime -- in the name of the irrelevancy of human rights -- can only stand still, stamping their feet loudly that there is no alternative. And in that race, it is the alternative which -- while hobbled by intimidation, restricted by suppression, hindered by punishment -- continues to move forward towards its goals.

First published in HuffingtonPost.com.

AUTHOR
Josh Shahryar is a Journalist and Human Rights Activist. Follow him on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JShahryar

Share/Save/Bookmark

 
maziar 58

Mr. fooladi

by maziar 58 on

Where that qoute by nabarmard came should came as such

 by mr hussain...khan E.pakistani noble prize......

It was not his words,even in some of his comments I SEE HIS Clear Iran parasti & supporter of current regime at the same time.

thanks                         Maziar


fooladi

Islamist Rat Yousef is screaming with anger louder than ever

by fooladi on

Maybe this bit of my comments to Josh touched such a raw nerve:

"Just contrast the bravery of this heroic Iranian woman to the cowardice of this west residing parasite supporters of Islamic regime on this site..... "

I guess, truth hurts...

 


Rosie.

Fooladi, Abarmard (INSERT, CROSSPOST)

by Rosie. on

Fooladi, Actually Yousef gave the story of his family in some posts early on in thread (I think at least one isn't there anymore) before I came on it. There was NO sob story. I am the one who brought it up later. And I guess I'm the one who made it into a 'sob story', to which he certainly didn't respond in kind. But he wasn't hostile either. And I still stand by something I told you below.

I do believe his being the son of someone who worked for the Shah, then turned against him and had to flee Iran, someone who was born during the Revolution, made him identify with this Revolution to try to connect with his father's better part by dissociating from the Shah, while advocating its worst cruelties to connect with the other part, the Shah's worst aspects. I do believe his unreconciled conflict, his being torn apart, is so symbolic of Iran's modern history and tragedy. Such a child of the revolution this young man is. What a child of Iran.

I think you do understand that about me because I explained it to you. I just wanted to say it for clarification to others.

_______________________________________

Abarmard, I wasn't going to say this but after seeing your exchange with Fooladi--(the beginning, INSERT: sorry, just cross-posted, but nonetheless), I will. I can't read your Persian but in your English post, your first, you argued against bombing. I couldn't agree more. You ended by saying 'some people are crazy.

First of all, how many people on this thread talked about bombing? Did you even scan the thread at all? If you didn't you should've. That's basic for a serious blogger.

If you did, and you probably did, you should not, I repeat, not, have used that word crazy just for the one 'camp'. How could you say that on this thread? This is why some people get so angry with you. And why, even though my politics are close to yours 'in letter', they are a world apart in 'spirit'. And why you disappoint me so much and have lately told you so.

And I suspect that (on top of maybe some personal reason, I don't know) it may be why you don't answer me anymore.

And honestly, I don't know if I care anymore whether you do or not.


fooladi

Amir: I agree we need to exterminate the islamist Rats.

by fooladi on

Also the last couple of commenst of the islamist rats here have been directed at me trying to lable me as MKO supporter, creating division against the opposition, an old tactic.

I am not an MKO supporter, but I liked their demo exposing the islamist regime. They used to carry out armed attacks against the islamist regimes agents, but they seem to have given that up, which is a shame.

I guess I am now in the "bad books" of the islamic Rats here, the book itself is safely hidden in the same hole the rats are hiding at, somewhere between London to Toronto :)


Yousef Bozorgmehr

PJAK apologists have no place among Iranians

by Yousef Bozorgmehr on

 

 Those who defend the "innocence" of Kurdish communist terrorists who hide in the mountains of western Iran and kill our soldiers are traitors - pure and simple. They should also be put on trial and, as prosecutor, I would seek the maximum punishment possible. 

We hanged the murderous Riggi brothers to the cheers of the Iranian people. Kurdish separatists will also face the gallows for their crimes. It is always their supporters in America who evade justice. But we'll get them - the reach of God's holy warriors of the Baseej is long.


fooladi

Thank you Josh for the excellent post.

by fooladi on

This post is superb. It is factual and blunt and well written. That is precisely why our "cyber bassiji" brigade have been howling and screeming in anger and frustration. They are all here, the entire brigade! They even got re inforcement from "Bassij brigade's London branch" :)

In the meantime, the criminals and murderers are hard at work. Take a look at the blog today on this site, about the 27 year old bright young Iranian lady facing imminenet execution, because of her political beliefs, after enduring three years of torture in ilslamic regimes dungeons, yet refusing to bow to the islamic criminals. Just contrast the bravery of this heroic Iranian woman to the cowardice of this west residing parasite supporters of Islamic regime on this site..... 

 


No Fear

Amir,

by No Fear on

Sorry, but can't stand anyone who chooses armed struggle against Iran. That puts them in my bad book.


AMIR1973

Islamists are rats whether of the MKO or Khomeinist sub-species

by AMIR1973 on

 

There is no such thing as a good Islamist, just as there is no such thing as a good National Socialist. Iran needs de-Islamistization just as Germany needed de-Nazification


No Fear

Sniff sniff ...

by No Fear on

Does anyone smell the unbearable foul odor of a MKO rat in the house?


Yousef Bozorgmehr

The US has no right to interfere anywhere

by Yousef Bozorgmehr on

 

The United States should not interfere in any country. It should certainly not support the tyranny of the House of Saud who previously backed the Taliban in the past.  It is for the people of Arabia to decide who rules them. If they want all their oil wealth distributed among 10,000 princes, then that is their right of self-determination - I don't think they want this, but it is not for anyone other than them to decide.

I already explained why I am based in the West: to educate the ignorant masses who are deceived by the corporate-run media. I have no problem with westerners, only their governments.  I am also here to protect Muslims and Iranians from attack by the MKO and other counter-revolutionary terrorists.Last June, I managed to get one of these animals arrested when he assaulted believers near a mosque.


fooladi

abarmad:

by fooladi on

It was not an angry response, it was a sarcastic response, but never mind, you would not get it...

Is your outraged response due to mauling I have been giving to your latest "colleague", the "commando Masoud" ?? You need to explain.....

your comments on MKO? Dont know which one, I tend not to waste time reading comments from users with obvious ties with islamic regime. This ilk will disappear off cyber space the day khamenei, ahmadinezhad and the rest of the killers scape  to Damescus in their money laden planes :)

And yes, we had couple of good posts on MKO, enjoyed participating and exposing the islamic regimes lies. Looking forward to more :) 

 


fooladi

"Facts about engelestan" per a cyber bassiji " commando"!

by fooladi on

So here we have this 75% crazy (by consensous of forum) Islamist cyber warrier who had been threthening everybody with hanging and amputation of body parts for disaaproving his sick "ideology" , lecturing us about England and it's system.

Does this idiot believe this forum to be as stupid as himself? he claims to be In England, but seems to "clock in and out" at time when most hardworking residents of UK are in bed resting after a  day at work. If in England per his claim he must be a  "night worker!" or another muslim assylum seeker living an idele life in semocratic west,  courtesy of the generous social benefits of the "Kafiristan" and it's hard taxed, hardworking tax payers.  

Then he gives Rosie, the american lady here, this sob storey about his parents and himself (as if people would care about a vermin only fit for extermination, let alone it's parentage!), all mixed with his military "commando" skills and his fictitious battles with Iranians in England! - Is this a chat line of some sort ? :)

 

 


Abarmard

fooladi

by Abarmard on

I don't see any reason for your anger other than my comment in regards to MKO in other post. In this regard you need to explain your intentions clearly.


fooladi

"تـــعــریــف جهان سوم"

fooladi


Boro in tarif haye man dar avardi ra be ame joonet begoo mozdoore bi vatan.


LoverOfLiberty

Actually, Yousef,

by LoverOfLiberty on

you and your apparent distortion of reality are the joke.

You apparently complain when the US makes deals with a monarchy such as in Saudi Arabia, but yet you will likely argue in the same breath, "How dare that evil US (or the West in general) interfer with the government of Saudi Arabia!"

It is clearly evident that you are consumed with your irrational hatred of the US and the West, which is a hatred that is fed by the propaganda that you have been led to believe is the truth.

So then, why do you choose to remain the hipocrite that you apparently are since you live in the West, that being the same West that you clearly hate?  Why don't you live in Iran alongside the regime that you apparently love?

(I'm betting that if war breaks out between the West and the regime in Iran, you and others of your ilk will likely scurry into a hole in the ground in fear, much like Saddam did in Iraq after his regime was deposed, since you are apparently just a cowardly child in men's clothes.)


Sargord Pirouz

Josh, it's perfectly

by Sargord Pirouz on

Josh, it's perfectly acceptable to withdraw from a discussion, even unannounced.

But you asked me to offer a rebuttal. And I took the time to do so.

Where is your detailed response? Or do you admit defeat in argument? (even by default)


Abarmard

تـــعــریــف جهان سوم

Abarmard




 جهان سوم جایی است که هر کس بخواهد مملکتش را آباد کند،
خانه اش خراب می شود


و هر کس که بخواهد خانه اش آباد باشد، باید در تخریب مملکتش بکوشد

Demo

The Last Comment, Perhaps?????

by Demo on

Have "No Fear" to visit a cemetery. That is where we all are going to lay down before the resurrection day when the real truth about everything becomes crystal clear. Incidentally Khomeini also is also in wait there after killing a great number of Iranians, Iraqis, Kurds, Balooch, and etc, & after committing a grave sin of suicide (by dinking the poisonous liquid) as a Muslim due to the defeat in the 8 year bloody war between the two so called Muslim nations.  


Yousef Bozorgmehr

Some other facts about Englestan

by Yousef Bozorgmehr on

 

As well as an unelected head of state, with command of the armed forces, there is an unelected upper chamber (The House of Lords) and a completely unelected judiciary.

Also, everyone in Britain knows that the civil service is very powerful - all of the "permanent secretaries" and "royal courtiers" are unelected.

When you look at Britain's medieval and feudal political system. you will realise just how advanced Iran's Islamic republicanism actually is.


Yousef Bozorgmehr

Amir

by Yousef Bozorgmehr on

 

So, now we know who Amir will support in the event of a US-Israeli attack on Iran - the neoconjobs who run Washington and Tel Aviv.

Just to point out, the government of Iran is elected - the President and the Majlis deputies are elected officials.

The office of rahbari/velayat is indirectly elected by an elected council of experts/khobregan.They also have the power to remove him - not so with the Queen of Britain who is commander-in-chief of the armed forces and has the "royal prerogative" as head of state.

The council members who run the municipalities are elected.

There is certainly more political pluralism in Iran, despite the screening process,  than there is in America whose system is rigged in favour of two big parties that are just two sides of the same coin. That is why many Americans don't vote - there is no choice.

The United States is a "totalitarian democracy"

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarian_democrac...

and "corporate plutocracy"

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatocracy

I suggest all you Iranian-Americans work to change your own system before you try and "liberate" Iran.


Abarmard

Ultimately

by Abarmard on

The arguments for some comes down to: we in the West will kick your behind, and attacking Iran means attacking the government. Bombing people means bombing Islamists!!!

Here would be some additions:

Bombing bridges means hurting Sepah

Bombing Energy sources means hurting Khamenei

Bombing schools means killing baseeji's kids

Bombing Universities means killing agha zadeh...

It wasn't long ago when some here used to argue that only baseeji kids are in schools and universities otherwise they would not be there! Some learned eventually how wrong they were.

No matter how dirty the arguments get, never allow your mind to support bombing or attacking your country by any foreign forces, and never wish Iranian soldiers death.

Some are just crazy.


AMIR1973

Piling lies on top of lies

by AMIR1973 on

 

Elected governments that don't do the West's bidding  

so the Leader of Iran was elected by the people? Sure, he was. And I did see Emam's face in the moon that night, just like the BBC said. 

Meanwhile regimes that plunder and oppress their peoples

a perfect description of the Rapist Regime. You finally got something right.

And if Iran is attacked, the baseej have sworn that for every Iranian that dies, ten citizens and soldiers of the states that invade us must also die.  

if there is a war, the ratio of dead will be 100 Islamists to every Westerner. it's a good thing Islamists "welcome martyrdom"--they just might get their wish   :-)


Yousef Bozorgmehr

Lover of "Liberty" - what a joke!

by Yousef Bozorgmehr on

 

We all know what kind of "liberty" and "democracy" you want for Iran.  

Elected governments that don't do the West's bidding are liable for overthrow - Mossadegh and Allende suffered that fate.They tried to do the same in 2009 with their "green revolution" and denial of the  will of the Iranian people, just as they had done in Georgia, Kyrgyzstan and Ukraine - thankfully, the "orange" and "tulip" revolution" have collapsed although 100 Krygyz had to die to get their rights back from the pro-American Bakiyev regime this year. 

Meanwhile regimes that plunder and oppress their peoples ,but who prostitute themselves for their western masters like Saudi Arabia, are rewarded for their tyranny and even given protection - btw, "green" is the color of the House of Saud.

And if Iran is attacked, the baseej have sworn that for every Iranian that dies, ten citizens and soldiers of the states that invade us must also die. This is the reason why they will never use massive force. You are afraid of death, whereas we love martyrdom.


LoverOfLiberty

Yousef

by LoverOfLiberty on

If Iran is attacked, I seriously doubt there will be much of an Iranian government left to be held accountable for any action you or other Iranian regime supporters in the West may do against the West.

And the West, along with its secular and democratic nature, will remain in the end, regardless of any action you or other Iranian regime supporters may do towards the West.

But you and your ilk, and your beloved "revolution," will very likely end up on the scrap heap of history, like other rotten regimes that have existed in the past.

And then Iranians will get the real freedoms they deserve. 

That is how Mankind has evolved, over the long haul called history.

And that is how Mankind will likely continue to evolve.


default

No Fear

by Doctor X on

 You are the one with Multiple sufferings buddy boy.

You do not tell me what my habits are and what they are not. So DO NOT.

Don't you also worry about what i am or not blessed with. You have so much Lajan to dig your behind out of. so focus on that.

as for the nonsens at the end.

Politics is not about finding the truth... Oh really? SO what is it about then manipulate first and then ...

One dimensional thinking? LOL yeah. Okay. Hey. get a dictionary too while you are climbing out of that lajanzar.

Democ chi chi?  LOL. Democ Rasti? Ya democ chapi? koodoom yeki belakhare?

 


No Fear

Doctor X,

by No Fear on

You have a habit of leaving a debate unfinished. I got burnt a few times when i replied to you in lengths. My answers to you, from now on, would be short and brief. Gotta save that energy.

If you wish to believe in " The whole truth and nothing but the truth " make sure to raise your left arm while your right hand is on your heart. pffff ...

Politics is NOT about finding out the truth. One dimensional thinking ,which you suffer from or blessed with, has no place in a democracy.  


AMIR1973

Lies, lies, and more lies

by AMIR1973 on


The Rahbar Mo'azzam/Vali e Faqih is similar in position to the Pope and the Queen of Britain. Both are unelected monarchs. Yes, England is not a democracy. 

Nice try. The Queen of England is largely a figurehead. Compare her role in English politics with that of the turbaned parasite leading IRI (in fact, constitutional monarchs in some Northern European countries are more restricted from political participation than average citizens! They are expected to stay out of politics and focus on their ceremonial functions). England is a democracy with freedom of speech, assembly, and press (including articles and books harshly criticizing the Queen and her family and repeated calls by some individuals to abolish the monarchy altogether--with no threat to life, limb or freedom on the part of the authors). There is no prohibition against religion in England--Christians, Muslims, Bahais, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, atheists, etc. Moreover, the Leader of England is not a cleric, unlike IRI where only a cleric can be Leader. Unfortunately, England has become a hotbed for murderous Islamist fanatics (including several who blew up busses and metros several years ago and killed several dozens "infidels"). 

Candidates range from hardline basijis to liberal muslims. 

IRI's sham elections include candidates of various Khomeinist stripes, just as the USSR's and Cuba's sham elections include candidates of various Leninist stripes. Nice try. 

Iranians do enjoy all civil rights as guaranteed by the consitution and enforced by the judiciary.

IRI's so-called "judiciary" is a medieval institution which uses flogging, amputations, stoning to death, etc. as punishments for adultery, sex before marriage, opposing the government, etc. Iranians don't have the right to wear what they want, take the head scarf off their heads at anytime outside the home, eat or drink what they want, talk with whom they want, hold hands, without fear of harassment, arrest, flogging, jailing, etc, etc. Nice try. 

What a joke the West-residing IRI Cyber Groupies. What a cruel and absurd joke. How much longer must this nightmare continue for our people? 


default

NO F.

by Doctor X on

Different interpretations can create different truths hence the relative nature of " Truth" in its entirety.

Wrong My friend. Different Interpretations CAN NOT be or create Different Truths. The Truth is not subject to any form of interpretation and is invincible and there is only ONE TRUTH. Your interpretaions of it are Shades of truth and not the real truth.

 


fooladi

So I am invited to a duel by "commando bassiji yousef"

by fooladi on

Believe me, nothing in life would give me more of a pleasure than getting hold of a vermin like you and squeeshing it under my feet. The problem is that vermins like you hide and run.

Should I come and meet you in England? You told us that is where you are currently hiding....


Rosie.

Fooladi,

by Rosie. on

Three quarters.