THOUGHTS ON IRAN FROM TWO FRIENDS

Some thoughts from two anti-imperialist
friends on situation in Iran

All the contributions are from Mohammed, and the last one from Dyab.

==========================

[Mohammed]

Musavi won Tehran very strongly, and Nejad won
everything else. I personally have no doubt that what is
happening now is a liberal farce. You cannot rig elections
that badly in Iran; they usually control things by not
allowing the people that they dislike to run at the first
place. The reason why things are so bad is that Tehran
thinks it's Iran, and the bloggers and metropolitan
intellectuals think they represent Iran better than the
rest of the Iranians. The main force behind this is the
faction of the ruling elite that was insulted publicly by
Nejad, esp. Rafsanjani and Khatami. They are very unhappy
about the guy, for good reason so, he called them crooks
live on TV. They are trying to tell the state (in
Khamanie's person) that you don't do this to us. It is a
fight within the ruling elite that looks like the Street is
fighting. I will believe what they say only when I see this
happening in Tibriz (Iran's second biggest city). The
results say that Nejad took Tribriz big time. If there were
rigging then it is Tibriz that should come out, not Tehran
where the results ADMIT that the Nejad lost big time! If
Tibriz comes out, then I'd believe them, and only then...I
think it is too much bullshit by the liberal faction within
the ruling elite to score a point with the grand aytollah:
the way this guy dealt with us is totally unacceptable.
After all, it was Musavi that started it by rejecting the
results, which means going publicly against Khameini.

[Correction: second biggest industrial city--that is second
biggest working class location. ]

…

The democratic Arabs are lamenting the elections rigging in
Iran.

Closing offices early doesn't get you a twice as much vote.

Rigging elections in such circumstances would never lead to
such a big difference. When you rig elections in such a
polarized situation you say I got 53% and the other guy got
47%. You never say I got twice as much unless you really
won, or this is a banana elections like Egypt, for example.
Iranian elections are not that banana.

Musavi was put under house arrest because he mobilized for
riots. A read a day before the elections a report by the
Republic Guard saying that they were planning riots (they
means rafsanjani, Musavi is a puppet, the demonstrators are
even more puppets), and that the guard will stop it. The
scenario is identical to what is happening now, almost in
verbatim. And the guard knows (meaning Khameni knows)
because it is a faction of the ruling elite fighting with
another faction. Khameni knows everything that the both
sides will do. It is totally infantile to think that
Musavi, that is Rafsanjani, is doing so without having let
Khameni know that he is angry and that he won't accept it,
because if he surprises Khameni in demos like these, his
dick will fly out of the window. On the other hand, there
are clerics supporting him with Khameni (Nejad is not a
cleric and doesn't enjoy their support). To assume that
Rafsanjani did so in a way that surprised Khameni is
banal--thus the republic guard report a day before...unless
you want to believe that the boys were shocked at the
election outcome and went to protest. But please note that
they did not come out until Musavi said it was rigged and
that he will not accept it.

The rafsanjani camp has to do so. Nejad is planing to push
them out of the picture on charges of corruption, and he
really insulted them very badly in public.

The Rafsanjani camp (Musavi if you prefer so) has no
illusions that it will reverse things or cause real
problems. What it wants is to score with the Grand Imam
that what this guy did to us is unacceptable, and secondly
to weaken Nejad in this term so that he doesn't manage to
get them. They are telling ayatollah: this guy is not to
touch us (he promised in his campaign to uproot the
corrupt, which means he will get them whether or not they
are corrupt), and they managed to mobilize important
figures within the regime in their support (e.g. the last
clerical condemnation of Nejad's way of dealing with Musavi
in the public debate).

All of this is mediated in via people protests and so on,
and some how what the people (of Tehran) are doing
spontaneously comes exactly like the report of the guards a
day before the elections! But if they don't do that, Nejad
will be powerful enough to fuck them completely. The first
who will go for example will be rafsanjani's son--a major
corrupt motherfucker.

There were as many people celebrating Nejad's victory in
the streets of Tehran today as there are protestors against
it in Tehran (the reformists strong hold! of course he
could have got them from the villages), indeed if not more,
but the media doesn't like to cover this. Jazeera did.

I'm not saying Nejad is good or perfect. I am saying that
he won, and that the others are really pathetic. All they
want from this is to cut some of his feathers off.

…

Of course one can be pissed off at the elections, but why,
for what reason, and so on, is what matters. In my opinion
one could effectively promote imperialist positions and at
the same time argue anti-imperialism. This happens a lot,
actually. I am not saying that anyone who is pissed off at
the elections is pro-imperialist; all I am saying is that
it is possible, especially with something so complex and
unclear. After all, like it or not, we are all products of
liberalism!

I personally agree with Chavez' generalization. Not because
of any condemnation of the people who were pissed of the
elections, or for that matter to say it wasn't rigged. But
you can easily note that THE WHOLE WORLD is up on its feet
to promote "democracy" in Iran. The germans called the
Iranian ambassador to protest what's happening and the
europeans called on Iran to investigate the elections, to
the end of what you know. And as you know, no calls for
investigations happened in Gaza, nor in any Arab elections,
again to the end of what you know. It is this level that
Chavez is dealing with, because every utterance about the
elections now is multiple. The fact that there are some
good people around who are pissed off at the elections,
perhaps for good reasons, is not at all the dimension that
Chavez is referring to. I think it is fine to do so; the
reference to the elections here means something else. The
anti-Iran craze, and this pompous assurance that Nejad
couldn't have won in front of a nice liberal guy whose wife
has been compared to Michele Obama requires generalizations
like these. I am just amazed at how everyone KNOWS very
well that the elections were rigged!! Really really amazed!
And the more I read about why it is so, the more I get
amazed (irrespective of whether it was rigged or not, it
doesn't matter, it's this absolute borderline metaphysical
trust in these strange arguments that really amaze me).

…

The socioeconomic problems that you mention Nadia are
important of course. It happens to be a recurring reference
too. As Mirijam said, people went out because of
accumulating local problems, whatever that may be, and
whichever way they see it (I doubt students and working
class problems are the same). Anyway, you know the rest of
the story. These problems reovolve, in turn, around Nejad's
bad economic policy and a supposedly inspiring alternative
by Musavi--"a reform of the sort that could inspire people
around" is a recurring comment too, by intelligent people
who are aware of all the imperialist problems.

So, what is Nejad's economic problem? The answer we always
get is rising inflation. And where does it come from? From
Nejad's bad policies. But what are they? Nejad gave large
shares of oil revenues to the needy in the form of
transfers, cheap credit, and salary increases. This
increased the money in the market without a comparable
increase in supply, which eventually raised prices. It is
because he transfered oil money to them that he fucked up.
Of course this was the wrong way to do it, but the
alternative that is being proposed has nothing whatsoever
to do with doing it better. It is about delegitimizing the
policy of oil money sharing, full stop. From now on, the
money will stop being channeled to these people. And this
means, from now on the money will go to the Rasanjanis of
the country.

Now people could very well find this inspiring; maybe good
people too; maybe comrades, why not? (I'm not alluding to
Karwan, etc, of course). That doesn't mean that I have to
accept. If they are stupid enough to like this "inspiring"
policy, that doesn't mean I have to like it to on the basis
that it is the choice of the people. I don't like the
choice of the people when they vote Wilders, for example.
And I condemn those who do so. Even if their anxieties are
real and harsh, even if they are small people at the end
reacting against the elite of the netherlands--so what! We
still condemn their choice, or don't we? My point is that I
can read policies on my own; and I can react to these
polices with my own brains. I don't need an Iranian guy who
"knows better" to tell me why this policy is good. I don't
like the idea that this is good because people are being
beaten for it, either.

That has nothing to do with the elections being rigged or
not. I personally I don't think that it was. There is a
serious great downgrading of Iranian democracy in saying
so, and also intelligence. Take the most basic arguments
for the rig, Nejad won the Tabriz, the problematical
working class city and Musavi's hometown. I think that if
they rig problematical elections, the first thing they'd do
is to give him Tabriz. They can still win without it, very
very easily so!! The only reason to keep it is if you win
it. In fact, I think they should have rigged the elections
to give Musavi tabriz in order to face less problems! While
it is possible that the elections were rigged, it is the
arguments that are put in favor of this option that
convince me otherwise. It is also the nature of the current
mobilization that make me doubt it. And the fact that
Khameni transfered Musavi's letter to the guidance beareu
for investigation doesn't have to mean much. This was a
formal pettion and he couldn't have done otherwise. The
alternative would be like saying fuck Musavi, which he
surely wouldn't do.

I also disagree with the idea that we need to see the local
and we need not let imperialism color our perception of
things. All of the so-called local activities that were
transmitted from Iran are also performances of imperialism.
Like it or not they form each other. Not to mention that if
it were a purely local thing then we wouldn't be having
this discussion, which is also informed by performance of
the colonial. The mere suggestion that we shouldn't let the
colonial color our views is a informed by the colonial and
assumes that it could be split from some local. I am sorry
to disappoint you on this, but I don't think that there is
such a thing.

It is not my purpose to lecture about the elections in
Iran. I am merely bringing in the fact that none of the
arguments that are being forwarded about the elections and
the supposed mobilization make any sense. The only thing
that one could do is to reject on the basis that they don't
make sense. The idea that we can accept them based on a
good local divorced from the colonial, in the middle of a
colonial, elite soap opera, doesn't make sense either. If
the elections were indeed rigged, then it is not because of
these silly arguments that are now being put forward about
it, and especially this bizarre idea of the socioeconomic
by which people would vote to have their share of oil taken
away from them! If in the event that it does appear that it
was rigged, I still reject Musavi and I still reject the
so-called choice of the people! Nothing in Musavi's
policies is progressive, especially the economic. If you do
come across something appealing from any other perspective
but that of a student or a journalist then please do let me
know.

Sorry if for condemning them, irrespective of the rigging
and how much they are being beaten, and for finding the
rigging idea stupid based on the supposed proof,
irrespective of the policies, and for saying that the
so-called local that you bring in, including the very idea
of getting the colonial out, is a but a performance of the
colonial--but this is how I see it.

…

[Dyab] The dust is still to settle in Iran and the image is
still unclear. After the big demonstration in support of
Nejad yesterday, today hundreds of thousands went to the
street in Teheran in support of Musavi. It is not
surprising that Musavi can mobilize masses among the
Teheran Urban elites. Both demonstrations cannot be seen as
an indicator of popularity, but rather as a show of
resilience. Khameni, the supreme leader of Iran, told
Musavi in a face to face meeting to file a complaint to the
constitutional council. Musavi will do that but is
insisting that he won the elections while Nejad won
according the the official figures by a difference of 11
million votes. All indicates that Iran is heading towards a
major crisis. It is very clear that not only reformists
within the Islamist establishment of Iran are rallying
behind Musavi, but also anti-regime forces who want the
Islamic republic to crumble. This will not be allowed to
pass. What I expect is that a sever crisis will force
Khameni to impose a compromise on both Nejad and Musavi.
This will leave the anti-regime elements alone in the
streets when the reforming islamists accept such a deal.
The revolutionary guard will then do the rest. It might
sound cynical and harsh, but any attempt to bring down the
Islamic regime in Teheran at this juncture when it is
surrounded by American troops in Iraq and in Afghanistan,
and with Israeli plans to attack it, such an attempt will
be objectively pro-imperialist and I wouldn't shed a tear
on it being crushed by the regime.