Thomas P.M. Barnett :: Weblog

Does this mean you think the regime survives? After the past 48 hours that seems like an open question. Now even Khamenei has reveresed himself and ordered an investigation into alleged fraud and the protests continue [1].

And I keep thinking, if a man claims twice in as many days that the results of an election are ordained by God, and then on the third day decides to investigate charges of voter fraud, isn't that pretty much the death rattle of a theocracy? I'm not sure you should throw away your eastern bloc analogies, maybe just move them a bit further west. I've been thinking of Romania circa '89 all weekend for some odd reason.

[1]
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/06/khamenei-cracks.html

Ahmadinejad's election "victory" isn't a chicken I'd count yet. There are lots of protests in Tehran, including Tehran Univ. and this might be the beginning of the end for him.
After all, Iran DOES have a history of the youth getting tired of the current regime and tossing them out...

The right words from Obama could have a strong influence on the protestors to keep up the pressure. But I don't think Obama is willing to embrace the Iranian "freedom fighters" anytime soon.

It would be wise for the President to keep any comments benign and brief. The mullahs seem to be very concerned that the election was moving far past than just electing a president. The US should not give them any justification to crack down on reformers more than they already have or will.

This questionable Ahmadinejad 'victory' may be much worse for him and the Supreme Leader than a close victory for an opponent.

That individual would be vulnerable to undermining by the carry over establishment crowd, accusations of being another Western stooge, and all his actions would be picked apart for possible harm or error.

Obama's doing the right thing by keeping his nose clean.
An embrace from a foreign source is a weakness right now ..or a pointless bonus.
Better to keep quiet .

@Brent...I think you're right. A lot of live blogging out of Iran mentions people talking past the vote count issue and more about the state in general now. It may be that the 'supreme council' punts, accords with Mousavi to take the heat down a notch and then re-counts to delay. If he "wins" at that point, they have at least remained in power. Otherwise, who knows---if any of the other major religious leaders turns, it could get a lot uglier.

Mousavi still does support the dev. of nukes, so not sure there's a big change on paper, but after these last 24 hours or so who knows. Things will be different no matter what now----regime change? real political shifts in the current leadership? new, active underground resistance? doesn't sound like the folks in the streets are calming down at all.

I'd also say Khamenei may have made a huge mistake by that 'review' statement---monday AM qb here---but if he would have stayed mum etc. pure repression may have worked? now by opening the door a slight crack, people may be deciding to really push on the door to open it all the way. interesting times!

I should be surprised that Obama hasn't said ANYTHING about the Iranian elections and subsequent riots & demonstrations, but I'm not. Heck, he could come out with something generic that doesn't take sides, but he hasn't.

He's painfully tone-deaf when it comes to foreign affairs.

Is anyone else amused/amazed at the power that technology has provided individuals to break state power? I know Tom talks a lot about terrorists and the empowerment of the individual in a destructive sense - but we're in the midst of watching it en masse. In the 1500s, you had to have swords and armor and peasant revolts were tough to come by. We invented guns, the printing press and cheap paper and things evened up a bit between the individual and the state, until we had regimented, standing militaries, huge increases in bureaucracy and (in some cases) state/establishment controlled media. Now Twitter of all things is being used to break the mullahs. A mass movement on a social networking medium has forced/guilted big-media (particularly CNN) to pay attention, achieving the asymmetrical victory while at the same time coordinate the protests among the activists themselves. All based around a phone? Neat trick.

What remains to be seen is if the military acts like Hama '82, Tiennamen '89 or Moscow '91. Personally, i'm expecting option 2.

Good to see Obama come right out and say exactly the right things. He supported democracy, didn't directly embrace (and thereby diminish) the people's uprising. Keep the focus on the Iranian people where it belongs. Bravo.

And with some of the Republican Guard in with the protestors, things look like they might be falling apart...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/watercooler/2009/jun/15/revolutionary-guards-arrested-iran/?newthread

@andyinsdca That's huge. Great link. Jives nicely with what i read last night: http://www.marzeporgohar.org/en/content/%E2%80%98reformist%E2%80%99-iranian-candidate-founded-hezbollah

I see two possibilities - Mousavi had more support in the proper military than I suspected or Ahmedinejad is using the crisis as convenient cover to get rid of politically undesireable (but unrelated) generals. Either way, things just got a little more interesting.