Western Hubris Won't Reform Iran

In the days and weeks following the hotly contested Iranian presidential election, many western analysts, journalists and pundits -- and even some respected Iran experts -- have seemingly become imbued with a kind of revolutionary hubris. Inspired by the brave young Iranians who have taken to the streets of Tehran and elsewhere on behalf of opposition candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi, these commentators quickly grabbed the banner of the "green" revolutionaries, and subsequently took to their respective columns and blogs in solidarity with these daring Mousavites. A democratic revolution was afoot, and it became their job -- no, their responsibility -- to catalog the accounts of this historic event.

Just one problem remained: there was little evidence of any such revolution.

Hundreds of thousands of justifiably outraged Iranians did indeed march in protest of the likely fraudulent election results, demanding that their votes be counted and their voices be heard. And while these demonstrations were at first large and impactful, they quickly -- and understandably -- dissipated once the oppressive Iranian police state began to flex its muscle. The political fallout that would soon follow resembled more an internal conflict of high profile insiders than a national sea change, as entrenched elites with conflicting interests embedded themselves with their preferred side.

But while the crowds began to dwindle in Iran, the opinion pages and blog postings of several leading news outlets and analysts continued to confuse the embers of factional discontent for a raging wildfire. Undaunted, the Commentariat soon became awash with every tweet, text and second-hand account of "revolution" coming from inside the Islamic Republic. Any week, day, even minute, the regime was bound to crumble. Right?

Not quite. Unlike the Shah and his father before him, the current Iranian regime -- bloated, corrupt and incompetent as it most assuredly is -- still enjoys the capital of perhaps the 20th Century's most popular revolution. At its height, the revolution of 1978 and 1979 accounted for nearly 10% of the Iranian population. Dozens of cities were consumed by riots, marches and demonstrations on an almost daily basis. The Shah could read the writing on the wall, and more importantly, knew how to count. The people no longer required his services.

The Mousavites simply don't have those numbers -- yet. This doesn't make them wrong, it simply makes them the minority. Any genuine revolution, so as not to be confused as counter-revolutionary, will require the support of the country's mostly silent majority. Ayatollah Khomeini didn't emerge at random as the figurehead of national revolt in 1979. His name was not drawn from a hat, nor was he nominated for his intimidating scowl. Much like the demonstrators and dissidents of today, he and his fellow travelers cut their teeth over a decade prior resisting the Shah's efforts to secularize the country. Today's reformists are green in more than color alone, and a great deal of work remains to be done.

But that work will only be more arduous and daunting with the gushing and premature support of western media and elites. Like any revolutionary regime, Tehran has gladly embraced the words and rhetoric of external actors and used them as evidence of yet another plot by outsiders to interfere in Iranian affairs.

And while this western hubris clearly affects the rhetoric inside Iran, it likewise impacts behavior outside of it. The Obama administration -- although insistent that engagement remains its priority -- has been left to scramble and account for its apparent desire to negotiate with a regime that arbitrarily brutalizes and incarcerates its own citizenry. As Time's Joe Klein recently put it, the administration's "body language has changed."

But Iranian reformists have befuddled the West on more than one occasion. The 1997 election of President Mohammad Khatami stalled the Clinton administration's efforts to prosecute Iran for its destabilizing terrorist activities in the Middle East, and gave several European governments a green light to invest in Iran, forgoing sanctions and containment. Isolating and affecting Iranian behavior took a backseat to "critical dialogue" and a "dialogue of civilizations."

Once again, large and looming geopolitical questions -- such as Iranian nuclear proliferation, regional cooperation in Iraq and Palestinian statehood -- are in danger of stalling or failing entirely due to yet another western misreading of Iranian factionalism.

Let's hope President Obama and his international counterparts can see past such revolutionary hyperbole. A genuine reform movement in Iran will likely take years, if not decades, to foment and prosper. The courageous youth in green may yet win the day, whenever that day comes. What's blossoming in the Islamic Republic marks a change in public acceptance of the Supreme Leader, and will undoubtedly mold the leaders and reformers of the future. The young woman tear gassed today may be the next Gandhi, King, or yes, Khomeini. A page has no doubt been turned in Iran's national history.

All of this is terribly exciting. It's also out of our control, and that's a good thing. History often needs the proper room to breathe, not the breathless instigation of a hubristic few.

Let these "greens" grow on their own.

Comments

[Zheegool]

As an Iranian I respectfully disagree. Perhaps there is some hubris in the writings of some pundits wanting to join the green movement (and they're all welcome), But I far prefer their hubris to your belittling of the Iranian struggle for freedom.
As one academic wrote: Revolutions always look impossible at the time, but inevitable in retrospect. The green movement definitely does have the numbers. What it lacks is the organization it had in 1979 (which back then was supported by many organized leftist groups as well as the mullahs through their network of mosques). But the principles of democracy are much better understood today then they were by the ideological class of 79.
I believe we will succeed because today we are witnessing the beginning of a "run" on the Iranian economy. This will only accelerate and lead to more people joining the movement and will eventually lead to strikes and paralysis. I predict Ahmadinejad will be sacrificed. What emerges is the real question.

[leutenizer]

I totally agree. The opposition is unorganized. As such, it threatens to weaken as it appears to have no direction. Also, what is different is that in 1979 the revolution had a clear leader.

Unless the opposition is able to organize and adopt universally acceptalbe themes, it will fizzle out. However, if it were to become organized with a clear leadership, then everything is possible. Universal themes such as government transparancy, and removal of inherent conflicts of interest within the governing system can unit a large populus, which can include the nationalists who support Ahmadinejad.

[leutenizer]

The return of some sanity to Journalism.

[morteza]

I respectfully disagree with your assertion! As an Iranian, I lived under the Mullas and their henchmen in my teenager years. Today, the situation has drastically worsened for our country men and women.

Majority of Iranians are opposed to the regime. Any dissenting view is met with harsh, overwhelming violence, imprisonment and torture ( it makes Hanoi Hilton like a vacation).
Even shah did not resort to such tactics!

Many Iranians are upset that United Nation is silent, there are no emergency United Nations Security Council meetings.

Perhaps, the permanent members: England, Russia, China ,and France are looking froward to their lucrative business deals.

[ModernTimes1]

"The only thing we want is the right to improve our situation. We fight for the right to go on strike, to form a union, all these basic democratic rights. Everything we do must be kept secret. But we can't just sit twiddling our thumbs, waiting for the Islamic Republic to fall. We must take the right to organize, practice it, without waiting for someone's permission. That means we must be ready to sacrifice."

Underground union organizer in Khodro, Iran oil plant.

[Ergon]

Is that the agenda? Referring to anti-Chavez coup plotters who used oil 'unions' to halt oil production in Venezuela

[ModernTimes1]

This is the agenda and the opinion of Iranian workers that would like to organize despite the oppression and anti-labor agenda of the junta that rules Iran. Deal with it.

[wereeverywhere]

IRI has a terrible record on unions. Just one more reason, as if any more were needed, for progressives to loathe IRI.

[Puck342]

It is so wonderful to hear something resembling reason regarding Iran. Firstly, people never really take a good, hard look at Mousavi. While he certainly isn't Ahmenijad, he is just as committed to getting nuclear weapons, just as staunch in his opposition to Israel, in fact, the most glaring differences between him and Ahmenijad (as it has been explained to me by my Iranian friend) is that of internal economic considerations that wouldn't affect us westerners or the issues that most of us care about in reference to Iran.

The Iranian people are pissed, but we must remember WHY they are pissed. they are pissed that their votes weren't counted, not that they live in a theocratic nation, or that they are inviting violence by continuing to pursue a nuclear program coupled with their ever-disturbing rhetoric regarding Israel. So yes, support the green party of Iran, because all people who live in a nation with the democratic process should have their voices heard. But had Mousavi been elected, it would not have signaled a new day, just a new chapter, if that.

[ModernTimes1]

The only thing that will defeat the Ayatollahs and the military junta ruling Iran is unrelenting mass campaign of civil disobedience.

[MemoryAlpha]

Observation:
Well, this is an improvement over your usual "send in the Predator drones and the F-16s" rhetoric.

Analysis:
I agree with your sentiment.

[ModernTimes1]

This is an utter lie. At no point in time have a advocated an attack on Iran.Learn to read and/or think.

[Ergon]

Thank you for your honest article. As someone who has extensive connections in Iran and is actually sympathetic to Iranian aspirations for democracy, I can say your article is spot on.
You must be Canadian, you're so free of the bombast that passes as journalism here! ;)

[Hass]

here’s no actual evidence of election fraud in Iran — IranAffairs.com has collected the claims and counter-claims (from WESTERN sources), and the claims of fraud look flimsy at best. Even the statistical studies are shown to be faulty.

Here’s a question: considering that Mousavi was a regime insider, who was specifically vetted and cleared by the regime to run for office, then why would the same regime see his potential election victory as being so threatening that they had to resort to massive election fraud to keep him out of office? It doesn’t make any sense, there has been no fraud.

What we are witnessing is a power struggle within the regime itself; and some discredited exile groups such as the MEK, and perhaps foreign intelligence agencies, trying to ride that as long as they can and squeeze it for all the anti-Iran PR they can.

[wereeverywhere]

What an insult to Iranians that over eighty percent turn out to vote and Ahmadinejad wins in a landslide. IRI refuses any transparency on the stolen election and yet you shill for the theocrats. What exactly do you admire about IRI?

You compound your willful confusion about the elections with not facing that Mousavi was one of the four, out of hundreds that tried, that was approved to run by the mullah arbiters. IRI isn't a democracy, far from it, and the reform camp had to pick among what was available. The election fraud was therefore a declaration of war on the reform movement and that war continues as IRI goes from bad to worse as regards human rights and free expression. Your denial is as pitiful as it is repugnant.

[jalex26000]

Wow, I agree with this guy! Well written article. I would onlay add that the US and our intelligence agancies and our 51st stater counterparts need to leave this country in peace. when the young people of that nation want to change things they will, and they should. not some faux staged color revolution.

THANKS FOR THE ARTICLE!

[anniecanuck]

And let's not forget the power of a plugged-in massive youth population.

[Ergon]

Mass campaign of civil disobedience in our own countries, Charlie, so we can defeat our own ayatollahs and basij of wall street, blue dogs and birthers :)

[Ergon]

Hubris? Isn't that a Ben n' Jerry Ice Cream flavour?

[Mark Mack]

I don't know the meticulous facts about the Iranian Election. I don't know the people involved in rigging the Iranian election. I don't know its arduous and daunting process. I wasn't there.

I do know that the Iranian people are my friends.

And Mahmoud Ahmadinejad acted stupidly.

Is that OK to say - or is that too Arrogant and Hubristic?

[Billy Hell]

Thanks for the level headed assessment of the situation in Iran. It's a breath of fresh air relative to the self serving subjective knee jerk articles and comments, leading many to dismiss their credibility.

[steel71]

Considering their civilization has been around much longer than ours, and I don’t think they’re too worried about us. We can’t seem to stay of debt, we have a population that depends on government for their biological survival. Can you domesticated dogs? Yes, and those same governments of the Western world our up to their eyeballs in debt and corruption. It’s better to concern yourself with immediate surroundings than peripheral surroundings. Considering the core of those surroundings are rotten.