Sorting Through the Facts in the Iranian Election

Every year I write an article for Parade magazine about The World's Worst Dictators, and every year I rank Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei among the 10 worst. Clearly, I am rooting for the current Iranian regime to fall and be replaced by a democratic government that respects basic freedoms. However, I am troubled by some of the U.S. media coverage of the current crisis in Iran, well-meaning though it may be. So here are a few factual clarifications.

Presidential Elections in Iran are Meaningless
You'd never know it from most of the coverage, but the Iranians did elect a reformist president, Mohammad Khatami, twice in the last 12 years. He won the 1997 election with 69% of the vote and he was reelected in 2001 with 78% of the vote. Iranians also overwhelmingly voted into power a reformist legislature (known as the Majlis) in 2000. Over the next couple years the Majlis passed bills that promoted democracy and human rights, and Khatami signed them. But none of them became law. That's because the Iranian constitution allows the 12-member Guardian Council of religious leaders and its leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, to veto any laws passed by the elected government. For all the attention given to the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, he is really just a powerless figurehead chosen by Khamenei and the Guardian Council to deflect attention away from the real rulers of Iran.

It has been exciting to follow the attempts of the Iranian people to elect another reformist president, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, but in terms of altering who is in charge in Iran, the election was no more relevant than a contest between Adam Lambert and Kris Allen.

This Week's Protests are Probably Not the Largest since the 1979 Revolution
Again, it has been uplifting to watch the Iranian people defy authority and take to the streets in huge numbers to protest the election results. Estimates have ranged from 100,000 marchers to "hundreds of thousands." That's an impressive turnout, but in July 1999, a peaceful, antiregime demonstration in Teheran drew an estimated 750,000 Iranians into the streets.

By Calling for a Partial Recount, Khamenei is Not Showing Signs of Vulnerability
Ayatollah Khamenei is a smooth operator. Although he is more than willing to use violence to put down threats to his power, he would rather use tactics that appear to respond to criticism without actually doing so. For example, when the reformists dominated the 2000 legislative elections, Khamenei told supporters that "The two factions, the progressive and the faithful, are as necessary as the two wings of a bird." Meanwhile, he shut down reformist publications and made sure that the newly elected Majlis would not be allowed to investigate any foundation that was under his protection.

The Guardian Council Decides Who is Allowed to Run
Iranian elections are not even as open as they appear to be because the Guardian Council is allowed to disqualify any candidate who registers to run for office. Prior to the 2008 Majlis elections, for example, the Guardian Council rejected no less than 2,900 of 7.500 candidates. Needless to say, the majority of disqualified candidates were opposed to the regime.

[cross-posted on AllGov.com]

Comments

[paganmist]

EricaLong,

The Iranian gov't have already admitted that there were up to 3 MILLION fake votes cast for Ahmadinejad in 50 provinces. They admitted it. Not the "US Media".

State media announced Ahmadinejad as the winner an hour before the polls were closed. We wait until the polls close here in the US before we begin sending in figures.

It is obvious to everyone but you apparently that those elections were rigged. The government of Iran has acknowledged major rigging to the tune of 3 million.

What does their admitting fraud have to do with western media? Not a thing. Your case, whatever it was, falls immediately flat, because the US didn't make their election fraudulent.

[Aleister]

THE CNN NEWS STORY
Protestors in Iran

THE FOX NEWS STORY
What's President Obama going do about the turmoil in Iran!?

THE MSNBC NEWS STORY
? Nothing ?

hmmm, what's Obama going do about it, I didn't realize it was up to Obama to decide what Iranians should do.

Here's a good one maybe Iranians should decide what Iranians are going to do about there fradualent election outcome.

i sympathize with them, government making the final decision in the election, it sorta reminds me of something...

[wereeverywhere]

Thank you David Wallechinsky for correcting the record. The truth is on our side and hopefully those rebelling will be able to bury a theocracy.

Juan Cole himself writing: http://www.juancole.com/

"The numbers do not add up. You can't have more voters than there are people. You can't have a complete liberal and pragmatic-­conservati­ve swing behind hard liners who make their lives miserable.

The election was stolen. It is there in black and white. Those of us who know Iran, could see it plain as the nose on our faces, even if we could not quantify our reasons as elegantly as Chatham House."

[wereeverywhere]

Some on the left have picked up IRI talking point that the rebellion is spoiled, rich kids. Like that 100,000's taking to the streets to face riot cops and risk their bodies and lives don't expose that lie. As someone on the left this absurdity disgusts me. From Juan Cole, june 22:
http://www.juancole.com/

"Saturday, they watched from their apartment window a clash between the police and the construction site workers at the Towhid Tunnel (which is predicted to connect Parkway to Nawab). The police tried to make a shortcut to reach the protesters, and ambush them on the other side, when the workers told them they would not let them through this led to a clash between the workers and the police. The workers used all types of construction machineries to halt the police from shovels to bricks and the cement truck. The situation between the workers, mostly from Lor and Turkish background, caused some of the protesters to rush to the aid of the workers."

[scottpot]

Rich that the U.S. corporate media pretends to care about democracy, freedom of expression, and the right to assemble after ignoring one million Americans protesting Bush/ Cheney and the illegal war in Iraq. .That was 2004 at the RNC in New York where 1,806 peaceful protesters were arrested. Where was the coverage and the need to 'hear opposing voices' . Repressive regime change begins at home.

[EricaLong]

Fallacy #6: "The repression of the regime is ruthless".

We even heard the regime "fired into the crowds" and absurdities like that that show that some people have stopped thinking and just like with Iraq, they are just picking their cues from the US media, who have been brainwashing them clean for 30 years.

The "regime fired into the crowd"?

So, police and military forces fired with ultra-modern machine guns into compact and massive crowds of thousands...and killed...7 people?

The facts: the first demonstrator that was killed was shot dead while a crowd of thousands was attacking MILITARY COMPOUNDS, after sending an entire day and night burning and destroying and setting things on fire. NPR reported this, in a rare moment of journalistic integrity amidst the spin.

Can anyone name ONE country when an angry mob would attack military bases and there would be at the end of the day only one casualty? The US?

Second, as was reported by European media, which actually showed the footage of the gunman, the other 6 were apparently shot by an isolated gunman (a pro-Ahmadinejad militia man according to the demonstrators, who shot into the crowd from the window of an apartment)

Third, the police was "violent and repressive". Sure, but no more violent and most of the time less so than the Seattle police during the Battle of Seattle when they shut down the WTO. Hundreds were arrested, the offices of the organizers were ALSO ramsacked, etc.

[snugglepuss]

@EricaLong - I like to understand as many points of view as possible to figure out myself what is the reality. In that spirit, what are your credentials on Iran? Also, I note that this is the first time you have made comments on huffington post, so it's not possible to read your messages in the context of your world view. Pls. take my queries as an inquisitive mind trying to sort out the truth.

[zaz33]

EricaLong - thanks for the information.

There are other progressives on alternative sites with simular opinions. Simply put, Ahmadinejad had support from groups with social needs simular to Chavex in Venezuela. (my opinion)

It's generally agreed that there are few facts outside of Iran so determining who won is almost impossible.

We may never know who won.

[wereeverywhere]

"There are other progressives on alternative sites with simular opinions"

So is this group called Progressives for Reaction. How quaint to support IRI who ruthlessly attack and jail leftists and secularists. You have to use some pretty thick wool to pull over your own eyes to support a backward, lethal theocracy.

[paganmist]

So the police in Seattle beat people and stuffed them into car trunks? Invaded private homes at night that they'd marked during the day? Beat 7 year olds and the elderly? Threw people off of bridges? Charged $3000 "bullet fees" to retrieve the bodies of those who'd died?

Who are you and why are you so ignorant?

[EricaLong]

US media fallacy #5: "No one can be elected President if he is not the Supreme Leader's personal favorite".

Dead wrong. In 2005 Khatami WAS elected despite the fact Khamenei did not want that and had gone public against him. The Leader was so frustrated at Khatami's victory he even thought for a while of canceling the elections. The buzz was the Assembly dissuaded him from doing so, too risky.

again, folks, the US media have been lying to you about Iran for 30 years, turning that regime into the US nbr 1 official bogeyman, though it should be obvious now that that country, even under the rule of the hard liners, is far more democratic and open than Saudi Arabia and the other oil emirates whom we support, protect, and fund.

[EricaLong]

Fallacy#3: "the opposition got 'the women's vote'. Wrong. They got the votes of the EDUCATED, liberal, and relatively privileged women's vote (basically the intellectuals, activists, feminists, students, younger working women in their 20s and 30s, etc.). That makes a BIG difference.

Here is an interview with a young woman who voted Ahmadinejad and explains why. Anyone knowing Tehran knows that there are at least as many young women like her as there are reformist university professor and College students.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105576955&plckFindCommentKey=CommentKey:93686dd9-62b4-44d6-82a2-48a6dc236218


Fallacy #3: "the opposition got the votes of the youth". Wrong again. Mousavi certainly got the liberal students and "westernized", educated youths but those are NOT by far the whole youth of Iran. There are a significant number of educated students, the more religiously conservative devout ones, as well as the poorer youth from the popular classes, etc. who voted for Ahmadinejad.

Check all the videos you want: it is quite clear the demonstrators almost all belong to the liberal educated "elites", students, etc. They understand and speak English, surf the net, Facebook, etc.

Basically, the reformists got the liberal students and a large part of the campuses populations but what is their proportion in the entire 18-28 youth of Iran, one should ask? How do they fare electorally compared to the poorer working youth of Iran who voted Ahmadinejad? Notice how they never say?

[EricaLong]

Fallacy #2: "The Iranian regime is a 'dictatorship'"

Well, the spectacular events of the last several months must have reintroduced some perspective in this crude fallacy. Can anyone imagine that anything close to what has been happening there could have happened in Saudi Arabia or Egypt, 2 of our "allies"?

The Iranian regime is neither a dictatorship nor a totalitarian regime nor a democracy. It is a hybrid that borrows aspects from ALL those systems.

The regime itself is a complex juxtaposition of and interplay between competing power entities. Even the Supreme Leader is NOT all powerful contrary to the myth. He is appointed by the council of clerics and he can be deposited at will by them, if they deem him too old or not competent enough for example.

A few years back they actually thought of doing just that.

It is also another huge fallacy propagated by the ignorant and lying US media that the President who wins is necessarily the one favored by the Supreme Leader.

In 2005, Khatami, the winner, was NOT favored by Khamenei, who did not want him as President and even thought at one point to cancel the elections when the results were out.

Pretty much everything the US media told you about Iran is either a lie or in the best case inaccurate.

[EricaLong]

US media fallacies:

Fallacy #1: the Mousavi supporters are "the Iranian people".

Sorry folks but they are only a part of it and most likely are not even the majority of Iranians. Keep in mind that for months the US media (it's a bit different elsewhere) have basically reduced Iran to the more liberal North Tehran where the opposition is concentrated and furthermore have reduced North Tehran to the Mousavi supporters, essentially liberal college students, intellectuals, and younger professonal working women.

It's quite literally as if the foreign media had covered the 2000 and 2004 US elections by showing you EXCLUSIVELY Democrates' rallies without even mentioning the other candidates and their supporters.

Imagine the distortion!

Those who voted for Ahmadinejad, I'm sorry to say, are at least as much part of "the Iranian people" and it's very possible they actually outnumbered the Mousavi base: the rural vote, the religious conservative vote, the votes of the poor, the illiterates, the popular classes, the under-privileged" or "disinherited", the nationalist vote, the anti-Israeli vote, the anti-western vote, the civil servants, the retirees whom Ahmadnejad spoiled too by doubling their salaries and pensions. (Many Iranians are like Americans: they vote on bread-and-butter issues) and more-- most if not all of those voted Ahmadinejad.

You might refuse to admit that but those too, are "the Iranian people". and they might have outnumbered Mousavi's somewhat restricted electoral base of educated College students and young more affluent working women.

[dems08]

You can keep some of the people down some of the time....

but you can't keep all of the people down all of the time.

[dems08]

A 5-mile long stream of people is not

"hundreds of thousands"....

[Khirad]

Quick review and to the point. Thanks. And yes, coverage is pretty sad. I remember having (albeit skeptically limited) hope for Khatami. The drafters of the IRI Constitution were diabolically genius. Give the appearance of Democracy to the people, without ever granting the true exercise of it. We saw that today. The final pronouncement of the Supreme Liar goes: even if it means up is down. The US media also needs to talk to more experts (though a few have done a good job). While Iranian expats living in Western countries aren't the most impartial, some are very blunt: every election has been a farce! I know for me, the fact that no president has lost reelection should give one pause. After all, if all candidates are preselected, how could they admit one of their choices was a failure? Although I'm going against your third point a little there, in implying that Khamenei is indeed wary of appearing to look like his divine authority has been compromised.