In Solidarity with the Iranian People!

Here is an open letter I have co-signed with the following people: Marjane Satrapi, Mohsen Makhmalbaf, Reza, Samira Makhmalbaf, Javad Djavahery, Atiq Rahimi, Thomas Johnson, Jean-Claude Carrière, Manon Loizeau, and Ariane Mnouchkine.

On June 12, 2009, the Iranian people voted overwhelmingly for the two reform candidates, deftly using the ballot to give a resounding "No" to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who had openly positioned himself in favor of the incumbent President Ahmadinejad.

The announced outcome of the election, whose fraudulence no one in their right mind can deny, has outraged the men and women who have seen their vote overturned, confiscated, stolen.

When confronted with a people who peacefully took to the streets to demonstrate their discontent and manifest their desire for democracy (more than two million demonstrators in Tehran on June 22), Basij vigilantes sent by the regime responded with blind force and even fired on the crowd.

Today the Iranian people are gagged.

Today the Iranian people are counting their dead, their wounded, and the disappeared.

Today Iranians' most fundamental rights are systematically and brutally violated.

Today more and more distressing news comes to us of the systematic torture of prisoners, intimidation of the families of victims, and the arrest of opposition leaders and activists.

The world cannot remain silent.

States cannot hold back their reaction.

That is why we call upon the French government not to recognize the results of this rigged election and to keep diplomatic pressure on Iran demanding that the regime:

• immediately free all political prisoners and all demonstrators who are being held;
• halt the suppression of demonstrations;
• respect freedom of expression within Iran

Please click here to hear my reading of this post live.

Comments

[Eggsackley]

Great article. It's frustrating not being able to help the Iranian people, but only they can really change their country. Our attempt to "improve" Iraq by imposing democracy has been a dismal failure.
But we can have a little fun and show our contempt for the president non-elect, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, by creatively mangling his name. Here are a few I have come up with: "Badmood I'marabiddog", "Wahoo I'mafascisttoo", and my favorite so far, "Toobad Aboutdemocracy".

[arle]

Bernard-Henri Levy could care less about the real result of the election from what I'm reading. He's pretty selective about what sort of oppression in the Middle East he's willing to speak out about for one thing. His article is just as propagandist as anything Ahmedinejad or Khamanei have said so far -- the Iranians "deftly using the ballot to give a resounding "No" to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei?" They were voting for /President/. Ahmedinejad's strongest rival, people forget, is still a cleric and was formerly the Prime Minister during Iraq's attack on Iran. Voting for him wasn't a vote /against/ Khamanei -- something that the Ayatollah should have realized, had he be wiser.

I wish people like Bernard-Henri Levy were being sincere, but I'm guessing they'd be just as happy with a pro-Western totalitarian shah (like what happened the /last/ time we intervened onto Iranian governance) as they would be with a full democratic revolution.

Obama's on the right track on this -- one thing he's doing right and I'm proud of. The voting fraud is the issue to focus on -- making this incident into an attack on the very structure of Iranian government plays /exactly/ into the hands of people like Khamanei because it justifies his fears (shared by the majority of Iranians) that the West cares less about the democratic process and more about toppling strong, independent governments (whether they are democratic or not)

[racetoinfinity]

Right-on!

"We are seeing a return of the tyranny of religion. We must complete the task of the Enlightenment for once and all. Only when the Enlightenment is firmly established can we shift upward to a greater vision of humanity." - Ray Harris -

Also, see his incisive articles about Islam:

http://www.integralworld.net

[newyorkid]

What if Ahmadinejad actually won the election as the recount is demonstrating? Would it be fair for the Republicans to violently rally the streets of US cities asking to nullify the elections just because they lost against Obama? Would you say that those republicans "fight for freedom"? Would the police charge against them and arrest them for illegal demostrations?

[arle]

To be fair, NYK, it's pretty clear there /was/ vote fixing in my opinion. They reported vote totals before the votes could have been physically counted (typically it takes three days for votes to be completed in Iran, and that's with lesser turnout than we saw this time), voter turnout in some districts were reported at absurd levels (I think over 100% in a few places) and the reform candidates lost in their home districts -- something which is incredibly improbable in Iranian society.

That said, Ahmedinejad could have credibly won a fair election. I expected the vote to be fairly evenly matched. I'm not clear on why Khamanei found it necessary to back up a rigged election either -- it isn't as if the reform candidates are pro-Western or even against the current governmental structure of Iran in its whole.

[wereeverywhere]

Who cares about what Republicans think about on any issue? Why would what Republicans do blind you to a people fighting against a theocracy?

Here's some what if's for you. What if you wrote or spoke something deemed 'unislamic' by IRI? What if you were gay or posted the wrong thing on your blog? Ask the people languishing in Evin their opinion on those, the ones that haven't been executed.

[newyorkid]

The question is, who mounted this disinformation campaign aganst lran? For what purpose? What about the real random vote recount? Nobody can possibly believe any pretence of caring for the lranians by the same people who couldn't wait to make war against lran.

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

Ahmadinejad votes up after partial re-count

A random re-count of 10 percent of votes cast in Iran's June 12 elections results in a slight increase of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's votes in some cities. After ballot boxes were randomly chosen and re-counted in the presence of the Guardian Council, interior ministry and district governor representatives, Ahmadinejad's votes increased in the province of Kerman, Fars news reported on Monday. The incumbent president's tally also rose by 12 votes in Jirof, after 17 of the 170 ballot boxes in the southeastern city were re-counted, according to Fars news. The report added that the re-count in Jiroft resulted in five votes being deducted from runner up Mir-Hossein Mousavi and one vote being deducted form Mehdi Karroubi, while Mohsen Rezaei's ballots increased by three votes.

[Charlotte Safavi - Huffpost Blogger]

Bernard-Henri, I appreciate what you are doing. If you get a chance, please look up my Huffington Post blogs on Iran. I think you'll enjoy them. They are personal essays on current events told from a multi-cultural perspective. Let me know if you visit.
Best,
Charlotte

[natturnerx]

the central illogic of the u.s. official position of questioning the legitimacy of the election in iran is that the u.s. recognizes the legitimacy of & is allied to absolute monarchies in the middle east (saudi arabia, jordan, united arab emirates, etc) that do not hold elections. also, the united states supported the imposition of an unelected monarch in iran itself (the shah). now our govenment expresses dissatisfaction at the processes of one of the few middle eastern states that at least does hold contested elections. the irony being that ahmedenijad could undermine any logical basis for american official dissatisfaction by simply dispensing with the very notion of elections & declaring himself a king.

[bismillah001]

Firstly, the violence occuring post-election is unacceptable, and the handling of the election was sketchy - from both sides of the split.

By "the people of Iran", you mean only those who supported Mousavi, right? Don't you think it is a little foolish to disappear such a huge percentage of the population in one fell swoop?

The results of the election are hardly clear. A poll about a week before the election had Ahmadinejad ahead with about the same proportion he claimed to win by. Furthermore, Mr. Mousavi declared victory before the results were even announced. What we ought to be doing is examining the material evidence for/against claims that the election was fraudulent. I'm sure the "people of Iran" appreciate your presumptuous platitudes.

My personal suspicion is that Ahmadinejad won the election, but some shuffling of numbers occurred to make his lead look even larger. But I am not so mindless as to pronounce with certainty that this is the case, or to imply that anyone who did not support Ahmadinejad is not a member of "the people of Iran". You should act in such a silly way, either.

[bismillah001]

*should NOT act in such a silly way

lol

[wereeverywhere]

One side is dying in the street for freedom and the other side is shooting. In IRI there's no freedom of speech, so the reform movement has the deck stacked against them to start. Evin prison houses political and cultural dissidents. Add to all that that IRI isn't a democracy. People are fed up, and it takes a lot of motivation to take to the streets in IRI. An even harsher censorship and internet crackdown and near martial law has slowed the protests right now. This unrest transcends the initial fraud, and I hope those brave souls can kick the rotten theocracy over.

[bismillah001]

"One side is dying in the street for freedom and the other side is shooting."

Wow what an ideological frame. Sounds Bush-esque, almost.

There is a third "side" you aren't considering: the ordinary civilians who voted for Ahmadinejad. In the interest of ALL the Iranian people, we need to get to the bottom of what actually happened during the election, because most of the news coverage has been a hodge-podge of rumors, assumptions and unconfirmable "tweets", coupled with a blind sentimentalism for "the Iranian people" (except all those millions who cast ballots for the guy we don't like) and their "struggle for freedom", "uprising" or whatever other cinematic phrasing has been used.

[balkanization]

Just because Westerners might support the protests in Iran for their own motives, doesn't mean the protesters are negligible, or their protests are wrong. The protesters (who do not have batons, guns, armed motorcycles, etc., by the way) took to the streets because the results posted seemed ludicrous to them. The government a few days later had a similar rally. But they bused in people from miles away. I can't say that Mousavi won any more than you can state that Ahmadinejad won.

I CAN state that the overwhelming force deployed by the Basiji (let's not forget the origin of this group; these are from the poorest classes, paid to be the expendable vanguard of the state), the IRGC, and the police is the same brute force we have seen in Warsaw in the early 1980s, Romania in 1989, Santiago in the 1970s, ditto Brazil, and, yes, Chicago 1968. University students, around the world, say and do crazy things. But what they don't do is smash up their own computers, beat themselves with batons, and haul themselves to the state prison (in this case Evin Prison on the north side of Tehran).

The state response to the protests is street thuggery. Of course, we can only watch from outside Iran. But that doesn't mean we cannot have some clear opinions on what is going on. Even with partial information (of which we'd have more if reporters were free to report, of course).

[bismillah001]

I am in complete agreement with you; you may have misread my post.

[The Political Moose]

The election crisis isn't over by a long shot. The Shi'ite people always hold a major demonstration 40 days after a tragedy. If that demonstration is violently suppressed, which it will be, there will likely be larger one 40 days after that.
This is how the Shah was overthrown. I'm not saying there will be a regime change but with how young their country is, it is a possibility.

[bergerkos]

Dear Bernard-Henri, just like yourself I would it was like that. I would the majority in Iran understood the right choice. But as for now...

Don't you think, that if the MAJORITY were opposed to the existing regime, we'd be seeing quite a bit more stirring in that country, than some activist demonstrations in a couple of big cities?
I still may be erring in details, but in my opinion, when the "overwhelming majority" is set up against something, then this thing they're against will soon be done away with.
If the majority on earth was set up unitedly against, say, stealing, then stealing would soon become history. The same must be true about the present regime in Iran: if the majority is against, then the regime will soon end, or at least change its guise.

So far, there is no sign seen of such change approaching. That is why I say, there is NO proof of any voting results being "overwhelmingly against" the regime. It is , for now, only your feelings, which I understand and respect. Thank you very much.

[gevan]

Use of the word "Solidarity" in the headline should remind everyone of the unfortunate events in Poland in 1980-81. The setbacks for those who we Americans saw as the good guys were not permenant, but they did take more than a decade to set right.

[Weareall1]

HuffPost's Pick

To all you bloggers out there who keep posting about anything(P­alestine,O­bama,etc) but the Iranian people,please stop.
Have the decency to honor the masses that died for their search for freedom. This is not about us back here in the US; it is about the plight of the people of Iran.
If there are ones among you who understand what living under a Totalitarian Theocratic please share your views with us.
I have lived many years in the Middle East, I have seen women beaten up because a portion of their head was not covered. I have witnessed people having to go to Mosque for prayers or else nobody would shop at their small stores.
This is about the Iranian people who want to have a little more freedom in the way they dress, talk, love and live. This is about people who are willing to die so that they can maybe one day write a blog in Huffington Post and express their views freely with no fear of persecution.
So forget about your liberals and conservatives, and petty arguments from the comforts of your living rooms.
As a Human being who has never had to fight for his Freedom; I salute these brave humans who are still giving their lives for their beliefs.
Everything else is just accessories.

[denisew]

Thank you Weareall1. There are those who react to everything by being uncivil. You are heard loud and clear by those of us who share in the belief that all humans are equal and require basic freedoms.

[HelloFunnyWorld]

To Weareall1 ~

Whoa, who are you and, how come the above lecture from you to other Huffpost readers, not only made it past the moderator/s on Huffington Post, but also got some staffer's seal of approval on it....??

We are intrigued.

We thought the Iranian people wanted, (and deserve) far more than some silly lecture from anonymous supporters of the previously bomb-Iran-crowd....

[Weareall1]

To HelloFunnyWorld

I am just another human being who is deeply concerned with the loss of human life in the protests in Iran.
I can not think of any recent examples(i have to go back to Kent State-not the best moment in US history)where protesters in a "Democratic" nation where massacred in such a ruthless manner.
In my opinion a regime that kills its populace indiscriminately is illegitimate and can only hold on to power with ever increasing force.
I think when its all said and done, all humans want pretty much the same basic rights in Iran, South Africa, Palestine or Alabama, geography doesn't really make a difference.
I am not or have ever been a supporter of bombing anything, and I do not pretend to know what you support.

[SCLAW]

Don't sound so self-righteous--
who are you to pronounce such grand
self-serving generalizations
on how this "major " protest should be understood.

Are you Bibi or Messr. Levy?

Have some perspective and at least a sense of proportionality
regarding the Middle East. This protest is magnified/produced
for your perception.

[Weareall1]

First of all thank you for thinking that I could have been Mr. Levy. Although I do not agree with everything he says; I believe that he is one of the most eloquent thinkers of our time.

I do not understand why you believe that I am making "self-serving" generalizations.

It is a fact that many innocent people are dying in Iran.
It is a fact that all Iranians can not live their Freedoms.

The rest; at least for me, is much less important.

[tiredofwaiting]

Thank you.

[eagleclaw]

This guy Levy should recuse himself from commenting on ANYTHING to do with Iran. Too biased.

[ModernTimes1]

Yes, he should be substituted by wise words of Ahmadinejad. Perhaps weekly column, putting 'em imperialists in their place.

[eagleclaw]

MT1, How is that "tweeting" thing working for you?

[tiredofwaiting]

brilliant. but some just cannot help themselves i suppose. it's almost neurotic this inclination to immediately bring up israel etc.

[Roozbeh]

This guy does not care about Iranians' interests. If Ahmedinejad remains in power it is good for Israeli far-right and another long years of pain and suffering in the Middle East.

[CJWebber]

Agreed, eagleclaw.

[MacQ]

Mr. Levy:
Nice try, but judging by the posts here, you will not convince liberals.
They are quite adept at ignoring bloodshed--they turned a blind eye to cambodia after viet nam, and their heroes are people like Che Guevara (who also shot people in the streets), and routinely try to make the case that the people in those countries are happy with their leaders. One poster below even said that farudulent elections are better than no elections.

The liberal attitude toward others fighting for freedom is sanguine. I guess they figure "I got mine, let others fight for theirs".
150+ years ago, They would probably have argued that the slaves were happy on the plantations.

[HelloFunnyWorld]

To MacQ - re your comment:
"Mr. Levy, Nice try, but judging by the posts here, you will not convince liberals.
They are quite adept at ignoring bloodshed--they turned a blind eye to cambodia after viet nam, and their heroes are people like Che Guevara (who also shot people in the streets), and routinely try to make the case that the people in those countries are happy with their leaders. One poster below even said that farudulent elections are better than no elections.
The liberal attitude toward others fighting for freedom is sanguine. I guess they figure "I got mine, let others fight for theirs".
150+ years ago, They would probably have argued that the slaves were happy on the plantations."

We take it you speak about your self. Yes....?? Good.
(2)On the other hand - If the answer is no, then kindly refrain from being presumptuous about other people. (3)No need to spray oil on the flames to distract from the real issues....Your last sentence was specially offensive.

As for Mr.Levy, it is more than obvious that he is desperately trying to put a new strategy in place no matter the price, to shape an outcome more suitable to certain people.

We all want a better world. Not - more of the same.

Or worse - more of the same just better wrapped!!

[steamboat]

So Bernard, did Obama's silence and not commenting for a week while people were being slaughtered and trampled work? Answer: NO !

Did the silence of the leader of the free world help the protesters? Answer: NO !

Has it made American-Iranian relations better? Has it brought the 2 nations closer to a summit meeting? Answers: NO and NO !

......History is the best teacher. Reagan speaking-out at the USSR and hardliners during 'Solidarity' did more to help the Polish people then any amount of silence ever could. Even though Reagan-critics were asking him to do just that.