Thursday
Mar182010
Iran: Reading Mousavi & Karroubi "The Fight Will Continue" (Shahryar)
Thursday, March 18, 2010 at 9:27 
Josh Shahryar writes for EA:After the protests on 11 February and a lull over the past month, the two most important opposition figures have spoken yet again to cement their commitment to the movement seeking to topple President Ahmadinejad. While the rhetoric is much the same and clear strategies or plans of action are non-existent in both their speeches, there are several important points which, on closer inspection, speak volumes about the maturing of the movement since its inception.
UPDATED Iran Document: Full Text of Mousavi Speech on “Patience and Perseverance” (15 March)
The Latest from Iran (18 March): Uranium Distractions
The first signal that the Green Movement is alive and well, perhaps going through a process of change, comes from Mir Hossein Mousavi's speech to the Islamic Iran Participation Front:
My feeling for the future is that this movement is irreversible. We will never go back to the position we were in one year ago. I'm very hopeful of the future. We have to transfer patience and hope to people. We have to welcome them to patience and endurance. We will insist on the objectives of the Green Movement until they come to fruition.
In the first part of his speech, Mousavi turns his attention to the reform movement. While he accepts that the movement has faced and continues to face serious challenges, he also declares that the movement will continue. This is a slap in the fact for a government that has pretty much exhausted every tactic in a dictator's book to silence an opposition seeking change. At the same time, it is a reminder to the opposition movement that this change takes years to come about and that giving up now is not an option.
In other words, this is a marathon; not a sprint. Hold your horses, regroup and live to fight another day.
Mousavi then turns his attention to outside observers. While the Iranian Government has been backed repeatedly by China and Russia, Mousavi wants a clear break from the current policy of rebuking the West.
We want to regulate our foreign relations based on national interests, instead of winning so many enemies and leaving not a single friend with every speech. We should not be so adventuristic. Independence is a benediction the Islamic revolution bestowed upon us and we should not lose it. We have some problems with the US and Europe, but we should set our relations based on our national interests, security, safeguarding territorial integrity and national development and growth. Our foreign policy should not be adventurist, nor should it create tensions. We don't have reliable friends to count on in difficult conditions.
In other words, the current policy of the Iranian government is flawed and when the Green Movement succeeds, it will seek to repair ties with the West. With this, Mousavi has put the ball in the West's court while, at the same time, circumventing the mention of China and Russia as friends of the people of Iran.
Finally, Mousavi charters a new course for the Green Movement. It is no longer feasible to just get the educated and urban class to follow the opposition. The movement must look beyond them to find more allies.
If the movement intends to race ahead, it has to spread among people. We have to explain to people that the only option to alleviate economic pressure, reduce soaring divorce and resolve many other problems is to return to the Constitution.
Under the present circumstances, we should not limit our interactions to the elite and we should reach out to other influential groups, including teachers and laborers. We have to explain the ongoing conditions to them in order to win more hearts and minds. We have to have our voice heard by all classes
In other words, if change is slow and time-consuming, what better way to use the duration than to win more allies by working steadily and changing minds among the less affluent classes? Mousavi seems to be alluding to the way Imam Khomeini operated more than three decades ago --- by making alliances and spreading the movement among the populace.
If Mousavi decided not to criticize the government as harshly as the opposition might have expected, Mehdi Karroubi, also speaking to the Islamic Iran Participation Front, took charge and made matters quite clear. He first took apart Ahmadinejad and Co. for criticizing the BBC and alleging that foreign media outlets were helping the Green Movement, asking asked why were there no criticisms against BBC when it was "assisting the Revolution". Karroubi reminded his detractors that Ayatollah Khomeini took advantage of all news agencies and media in his political struggles against the monarchy and no one in the Islamic Republic would accuse him of having foreign ties.
At the end of his speech, Karroubi said what many in the Green Movement were waiting to hear. In his harshest criticism of the system so far, Karroubi claimed that the Islamic Republic which the people voted for in the beginning of the Revolution "is not the Islamic Republic that we now have".
Both statements are more candid and bolder than those made by Karroubi and Mousavi earlier in the crisis. Perhaps the Green Movement is indeed moving into a different direction after 11 February.
Reader Comments (18)
Josh
Good summary which points out the three main clarifications that hit me as well, especially the second, concerning the foreign policy of the country, is very important.
[...] März 2010 von Julia Veröffentlicht auf Enduring America am 18. März 2010 Quelle (Englisch): http://enduringamerica.com/2010/03/18/iran-reading-mousavi-karroubi-the-fight-will-continue-shahryar... Deutsche Übersetzung: Julia, bei Weiterveröffentlichung bitte Link [...]
Josh and Scott, I think it is very interesting the way Karroubi and Mousavi are working together to carry a message. Alone, both of them have flaws, but together they are growing into the leadership roles that have been forced upon them.
Mousavi doesn't appear angry enough for some in the Green Movement. However, he has the ability to press for change from the inside of the government, the reform movement, and he also has a very MLK/Ghandi sense of patience and perseverance.
Karroubi, on the other hand, has been pushing harder, perhaps as hard as one can without being branded a traitor and thrown in prison. He is keeping Mousavi in check as much as he is keeping Ahmadinejad and Khamenei in check.
It appears that this is not a mistake. It is entirely possible that these roles have been coordinated. Also, the strategy to slow the movement down may be an effort to avoid some of the violent backlash that was witnessed during Ashura. I understand that the protesters were fighting back, and took to the streets with non-violent intentions, but until the Green Movement reaches a breaking point where a successful open revolution is possible, these kinds of clashes might be more damaging than helpful to the image of the greens inside Iran.
Thanks for digging out the nuggets of Mousavi's lengthy speech for us. While I broadly agree with your analysis, you make an observation which I don't think is accurate, referring to the current regime as "a government that has pretty much exhausted every tactic in a dictator’s book to silence an opposition seeking change".
I don't thnk they have even tried to be exhaustive yet - maybe they just don't dare or maybe they think they, too, can wear down the opposition in a marathon without having to "go all the way" (think Stalinist purges, Tianenmen Sq., dirty wars a la Chle and Argentina, Burma, North Korea, etc.) Mousavi, Karroubi and Khatami haven't even been arrested yet. Let's hope they don't change their mind.
Another great article Josh. Thank you.
To Catherine's comment, I agree but maybe one way to view is to say exhausted every tactic that would not, in their mind, completely deligitimize the IRI. The regime has had an excuse for every ation taken however if more "extreme" measures were taken (extreme under THEIR defintion) would lead to more within the establishment pushing for change and resulting in some sort of implosion if you will.
Why don't you guys give up some of your pre-conceptions and just accept that as the Univ of Maryland poll confirmed that the AN govt is popular with the majority of the people & the same majority are happy with the VF system. Accept also that those in government are not altogether ruthless and cruel and do genuinely want an improved Iran but not under the tutelage of US/Israeli interests which some in the opposition are sucking up in their desperation to somehow get into power & perhaps do a Chalabi. Have the US attack Iran under the pretense of removing a tyranny & saving
the world Iranian nukes but still leaving the people of the Middle East under the threat of Israel's 200 odd undeclared & unmonitored nukes & of course the thousands in the possession of the only country that has actually used not one but two nukes & has a war policy that keeps the option of using nukes even as a pre-emptive measure against even a non-nuclear country. Compare this with the brave & unequivocal declaration, which the US/Israeli does not want its ordinary citizens to hear, that it is against Islam's teachings to have such WMDs and IRI has no intention of making one.
@REZVAN
I have been following the election in Iraq with interest. It is taking them quite a long time to count all the votes - as well it should. It has to be done all by hand and there are a lot of voting places in Iraq, widely spaced apart and a lot of voters.
The Iraqis must be a lot slower to do things than the Iranians - because your countrie's votes (how many millions of them??) were all counted only a few hours after voting ceased. Even in my country, which has the latest electoral technology, it often takes many days before the final count is in. Your election officials must be very clever to be able to count so many votes so quickly.
Barry
Rezvan,
We covered the University of Maryland's autumn poll at the time it was released, and we have covered the subsequent attempt to claim pre-election majority support for Ahmadinejad in a series of University of Tehran polls (polls which were not released at the time they were taken, but only at the start of 2010).
The idea of a foreign organisation carrying out a telephone poll in autumn 2009, given the internal situation, that would get meaningful results? I could write pages on the flaws, but http://enduringamerica.com/2009/10/08/iran-a-telephone-poll-on-politics-you-can-absolutely-trust-trust-us/" rel="nofollow">Persian Umpire took this apart --- and brought more than a couple of laughs --- in a few paragraphs).
S.
@ Bijan RE your post 5
Good clarification. If Josh had written it that way I wouldn't have raised any objection ;-).
Thanks Catherine.
rezvan,
Your starting to sound like the regime "all is perfect and no troubles at all." If you bothered to read the whole poll the damning evidence is the fact 27% refused to answer!! That figure invalidates the poll and the report all but admitted that. Now when taken into context of the timing and events how can one responsibly expect someone to answer any other way than pro regime? Come on!!! How can one be expected to voice disent, even if it saying they simply support Moussavi, when they believe someone is listening in.
I also get a good laugh out of this considering Iran sees the the US economy, universities, and media as Zionist controlled entities bent on its destruction. Quite odd they would exclaim something coming out of the mouth of the Great Satan--isn't it all lies anyway? This action just shows the hypocrisy of the regime and their desperation to cling to anything that means legitimacy for the regime.
Thx
Bill
@ Bill (and others discussing the the University of Maryland’s poll),
No surprise who in Iran was involved in those polls - none other than Prof. Mohammad Marandi and his Ph.D. plant in Maryland! On the Tehran University Faculty of World Studies website (http://fws.ut.ac.ir/ltr/Default2.aspx) where he heads the North American Studies Department, the top item in the NEWS menu announces:
PEOPLE & THE TENTH ELECTION
The tenth presidential elections of the Islamic Republic of Iran created many controversies both inside and outside of Iran’s geographic borders. What was lost in these controversies, however, was the true voice of the people, which is attainable through scientific national probability sample surveys. While many journalist, public figures, and Iran experts have talked on behalf of the Iranian people, very few of them have actually relied on scientific surveys. PEOPLE & THE TENTH ELECTION, which is in the process of being published, relies on a series of scientific surveys and describes the tenth presidential elections from the people’s perspective.
Some of these surveys have been carried out by internationally renowned organizations, such a Terror Free Tomorrow and WorldPublicOpinion.org, using calling centers from outside of Iran and the rest have been conducted domestically under my supervision and management of Mr. Ebrahim Mohseni, a PhD student from University of Maryland School of Public Policy. The data sets of the domestically conducted surveys, the specifications of which are described in the table below, are available for use by academic and research institutions. If you are an academic or a member of a research institution and are interested in these datasets (SPSS files), please send your requests to me via E-mail (mmarandi@ut.ac.ir), using your institutional E-mail.
Catherine,
thanks for connecting the dots! I was not aware of the connection but now it is apparent who is pulling the strings. However don't you find it odd a "academic" would use such faulty polling data. Any one having taken a basic statistics course could tell you the Univ Maryland poll is very flawed. Again this just speaks to the desperation of the regime to cling to anything, even if its from the Great Satan, that validates their hold on Iran.
Thx
Bill
Bill,
You asked me "don’t you find it odd a “academic” would use such faulty polling data".
He uses relies on specious arguments and outright falsehoods when he participates as a guest or interviewee on news and current affairs programmes, and even in during the prestigious BBC World Doha Debate. What difference does it make whether its polling data that's faulty or what he's claiming during an interview or debate? His specialty is manipulating and distorting the truth.
By Scott's own admission, the first round was likely to be a cliff hanger. Since the iranian constitution only requires for a candidate to have 51% of the votes to have won (a fairer method than that in the 'civilised' world's premier 'democracies' of the US & UK), it is therefore not inconceivable that AN actually did win the election albeit by a narrower majority than officially declared', most independent pundits think this was the case. Further precedence has always been that the incumbent wins. All previous elections where held according to the same rules & no one cried foul when both Rafsanjani & Khatami won two terms. By the standards of the region Iran's elections have been far freer & fairer and certainly not even the US can boast of an 85% turnout. In substance there is no material difference between Mosavi and Ahmedinejad, there is only a difference of style & language. Both are committed to the IR and to Iran's peaceful nuclear programme. Mosavi & the reformists would not recognise Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian lands. Both claim to follow the line of the late Imam Khomeini who was firmly against foreign interference in IRI's internal affairs and was the one who called the US, the Great Satan. Iranian politicians are no different to politicians elsewhere, they operate within spoken & unspoken rules. There is only one US coongress woman who dares openly to be critical of the Israeli regime and of militant Zionism adopted by the majority of Israel's political class that is akin to the racial apartheid practiced by white South Africans. Most other congressman would not even dare to utter a mild reprimand of Israel as their political career would quickly come to an end. In the self styled leader of the free world, most of its politicians are hostage to the machinations of a tiny racist state that has been the persistent violator of UN sanctions & many international laws. Surely as US citizens you should be asking yourself why your politicians are hostage to not even Israelis as a people. For there are many good people amongst them, but to a rabid racist minority of Jewish settlers supported actively by the Netenyahu govt who are bent on derailing any prospect of a peaceful settlement and seem to increase their activity everytime there is a prospect of peace. If you are true democrats you should be seeking accountability & if necessary organise mass street protests in Washington & NY and get several millions demonstrating every day & calling for these hypocritical US politicians to be removed. We will then see how free is the leader of the free world. Iranians have shown that they are able to remove their dictators. Let Enduring Amercia become Revolutionary America then it might just be possible to have a more peaceful & fairer world.
@REZVAN
"it is therefore not inconceivable that AN actually did win the election albeit by a narrower majority than officially declared’, most independent pundits THINK this was the case."
That is the problem -- nobody really knows what the result was!!
"In substance there is no material difference between Mosavi and Ahmedinejad, "
I think that you had better tell that to Mousavi - he seems to be a little bit upset. I am sure he would calm down if you could just tell him that he is no different to Ahmadinehjad. He probably doesn't realize that!
Actually - there is no need . He does already know it. Khamenei said that they were much the same, but Khamenei personally preferred Ahmadinejad and THAT is why the results came out as they did!!
Barry
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps6Q2Kv4B2w&feature=related