Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
A Divided Country United by the Spirit of Democracy
A brave people went in their millions yesterday to vote for the next president of Iran.
They went for the right reasons and they went for the wrong reasons but they wanted a say in how their country is governed. In their tens of thousands, they waited in Tehran amid the sword-like heat of summer to insist that they had duties and obligations towards their society. Alas, the clerical blanket which smothers Iran will ensure that mullahs - not people - ultimately get their way. Thank you, Ayatollah Khomeini.
Not since the first free Iraqi elections have a Middle Eastern people so staunchly demonstrated their right to be heard. The last elections in Iran provided a 60 per cent turnout. Now some were saying it was 80 per cent, even 85 per cent. I found the mosques and schools of Tehran packed to capacity, the overflow winding back down the hot pavements and across the baking highways.
Never before in Iran - not since the Islamic Revolution that brought all this about - have I heard such a thunder of free speech. No, it is not a new Iran we are going to see, even if the favourite Mirhossein Mousavi wins the ticket. (Both Mousavi and the unbalanced Mahmoud Ahmadinejad were last night claiming victory.) But it will be a little bit stronger than it was before. Please God, not a little bit more dangerous.
This new spirit could be heard outside the Issar School voting booths in Shaheed Mozaffarikhah Street - yes, of course this martyr died in the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, but then that awesome conflict had a lot to do with the turnout, as we shall see. "There are different reasons why I am here," Mariam Amina said to me, the less courageous voters - who didn't want to talk to the foreign journalist - listening to her every word. "I was not going to vote - I wasn't. But then I thought my silence would help someone who is not qualified to be president of Iran. And I thought my one vote would be worth it and that the person who becomes president would be a good president." Could there be a better reason for any democrat in the world to vote? The psychology student did suggest - unwisely, as I pointed out to her - that the British did not vote in such numbers "because they don't need to change their government". Corruption, I gently offered, is not a uniquely Arab or Iranian phenomenon - but her courage drew others to talk. A trickle of words turned into a waterfall. Ehsan, his unwillingness to give his family name told its own story - got the day about right. "Maybe people aren't here for the voting," he said. "Maybe it's only a political demonstration against the regime. We don't have any way to say why we need to change."
Minar - suffice it to say that every woman was scarved or chadored, albeit with ever increasing fringes of hair glistening beneath the sun - thought the "unpredictable debates" on Iranian television had a role in bringing the people of Tehran on to their canyon-like streets. "No one knew what would be said on television. That's why so many people are taking part in this election. The Supreme Leader [Ayatollah Khamenei] didn't want those cameras but they were there."
They were indeed, and there was much conversation among the crowd as to why the long-dead Ayatollah Khomeini had laid this permanent crust of Islamic rule over a real democracy of the people. Ehsan thought it accounted for the failure of the Mohamed Khatami government, "the chain over us," he called it. "There are people surrounding the Supreme Leader and they are all in line with him."
Then came the shadows that always lie away from the blinding sunlight of Tehran. A man called Kurosh - "Kurosh" is Persian for Cyrus, as in Cyrus the Great - took me to the shade on the other side of the street. He didn't want to be heard. "In the case of Mirhossein [Mousavi], he might have a successful vote, he could save the country freely. But I think in the next years, there may be a bloodbath in Tehran, because there are two totally divided sides in the country. All this is silent at the moment..."
Quite so. On Thursday, for the second time in five days, the judiciary authorities closed down the pro-Mousavi newspaper Yaseno. President Ahmadinejad's boys were at work again. And as I drove to the poverty of south Tehran - you always know you are heading for the poor here, because all roads to them lead downhill - there were those childish posters of the ever-smiling country boy who is still - just - the President. Ahmadinejad running in his sports clothes, Ahmadinejad among his smiling people, Ahmadinejad playing football.
Inside the Hasrat Rasoul Mosque - and here we were definitely amid the poverty of the capital - there were three state television cameras (Ahmadinejad's work again, of course) and there were thousands waiting to vote, old bearded men, young labourers, half shaved, in dirty trousers, and on the other side of the "masjid" a row of women, their chadors billowing in dark clouds. "For Ahmadinejad, naturally," came the first male voice. "Because he's an expert and an uncorrupt person. I didn't vote for him last time because I didn't know him. But his plans have always been complete and successful."
What was this? The man who has turned Iran into a laughing stock, who clearly cannot understand economics - reporters do sometimes have to tell the truth - is "complete" is he? He is "successful" is he? Though at the end, that's what his election result might prove to be. Then 52-year-old Hassan Danesh revealed himself. He runs a clothing store in the Great Tehran Bazaar. Same old story, the bazaaris in league with the clerics, just as they were in the 1979 revolution. Then a shock. A veteran of the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, white-haired now, Asghar Naderzadeh stepped towards me. He was a Basiji, a religiously inspired volunteer to fight Saddam, fought at Shalamcheh, arrived on the front lines at the age of just 14. "I want Mirhossein," he said. "The war veterans all know him as a good person. He managed the war perfectly and controlled inflation during this period." The old Basiji, it should be understood, were heroes and died for Iran. The new version, the young men who never fought but cluster around the Supreme Leader, are a political breed.
Another man, after Asghar, nameless this time but voting once more for Mirhossein "because of the way he speaks, his promises..." And then, inevitably, the voice of conservative womanhood. "All the time, Iran is a victory for Muslims. Everywhere imperialism has intimidated countries. We are all supporters of the Supreme Leader and the [Ahmadinejad] government." Untrue. Samaya was voting for the first time, a job in public relations management, who had listened to all four candidates in the televised debates. "It's my responsibility to vote for my president, Mirhossein Mousavi. His personality is fit for being a president."
We were all being watched and listened to - at far too close quarters - by a young army officer, a lieutenant with an AK-47 rifle, unshaven but with hard, strong eyes. Was this Big Brother, coming to betray those who wished to speak their minds?
Again, another woman, 27-year-old Marjan, a student of English translation at Tehran university, in jeans and a long black cloak and scarf. "I love my country and I love my revolution and I would like a good president for my country, Mr Mousavi. He helped save our country." It seemed the 1980-88 war cannot go away.
An older lady now. "We want to protect the blood of our martyrs in the war. I am the sister of a martyr who died in battle at Fakkeh in Khuzestan, a housewife with two daughters and I want Ahmadinejad." Then came the classic illogicality. "I don't want Mousavi to be president because he's going to promote bad 'hijab'. We don't need more freedom for girls to go out in bad dresses."
She was not alone. Kobra, a nurse in a scarf and purple coat, wanted the same as the housewife in front of her. "I vote because of my beliefs, because of love for this country's Islam and for the blood of our martyrs. It must be Ahmadinejad. He is the icon of resistance and courage." This was extraordinary. Kobra was transposing Ahmadinejad from hero of the 1980-88 war - which he was not - into hero of the war against George W Bush, a war of threats, to be sure, but certainly not a war of weapons. And then Kobra surprised us all. "I think President Obama is approaching Iran properly and this will be accepted in our society. We want other people in other countries to acknowledge us as human beings. All of us believe in God, like the Christians and the Jews. You believe in Jesus, we believe in Mohamed. We are all the same. In this election, I am looking for a channel to express my ideas. Tell everyone that we love Western countries."
This was a deeply moving statement of love and belief to come from an Ahmadinejad voter but just at that moment, the army lieutenant came up to me, rifle over his shoulder. "We are persuading these elements that we are having a democracy in Iran," he told me. "But democracy is for people who know their own intentions. Iranian people don't know what they want. Democracy will not work here. People should be educated, then they know what they want. Don't you believe that?" I said that you cannot filter out the poor from the educated and let only the rich and the powerful rule. I guessed the soldier was a bright man - I was right, he was a mining engineer in civilian life - but then up came the man from the interior ministry and the man from the governorate and told the soldier he was not allowed to talk to journalists. And this was when Lieutenant Zuheir Sadeqinejad of the Iranian army replied. "I was asking the journalist questions," he snapped back. "And I have the right to speak."
And I wondered if - despite his flawed argument - he wasn't the greatest democrat of them all.
The expats' view: 'I knew we had to come out'
With its patio cafés and millionaire mansions, Kensington Court in west London is usually more accustomed to the genteel comings and goings of its well-heeled residents. Yesterday it could have been mistaken for north Tehran. Thousands of chanting Iranians gathered outside the Iranian consulate to cast their vote - something that expats have rarely done during previous elections. But this year's presidential race has invigorated Britain's Iranians like never before thanks to the astonishing rallies of the reformist candidate Mirhossein Mousavi. Maryam Gol, who left Iran in 1974 and now lives with her family in Milton Keynes, was one of hundreds patiently queuing up to vote yesterday afternoon. It was the first time she had cast a ballot since settling in the UK. "When I saw just how many young people came out to support Mousavi,
I knew we had to come out and help them," she said. "People truly believe that change is on the way." If supporters of the conservative incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad were present they were keeping their heads down. Instead the street was filled with hundreds of young, expectant Mousavi supporters in his green campaign colours and chanting slogans hoping for change. Students Fasilat Nassiri, 23, and Behrad Parvar, 25, were queuing with friends who all said they were voting for Mr Mousavi. "Refusing to vote is not an option," said Ms Nassiri. "I don't think things will suddenly change but there is a glimmer of hope. We have to seize that."
- Posted in




20 Comments so far
Show AllSioux Rose
Thank you Mr. Fisk for being (so often!) on the front lines. It's interesting to hear from "voters on the street," as their various illusions and ideals happen to mirror those of voters in the U.S. In both cases the leaders are departing substantially from what the public wants. However, the public, twisted by all kinds of religious half-truths is, as the soldier-guard related, not especially well enough informed on vital issues to render a viable vote. It helps lift all ships when everyone in a society is educated; and their information is not based on a myth-making media, but rather, upon an exposure to Truth and the actual dynamics (political, economic, structural) genuinely at play.
Actually, if you go to Google and do a search using 'Isael only democracy in middle east', you will find that Iran isn't a democracy even if 85% of the people turnout to vote. Israel on the other hand is the only example of true democracy in the middle east and is a shining light in the midst of darkness. Really...don't laugh! Strange that no one is yet calling Iraq a democracy.
Where in this article did Robert Fisk imply that Iran is a democracy?
Turkey and Lebanon are excluded from your Google generated definition of a 'true democracy'?
Palestine?
What drugs are you on, mr. Kayaker?
What gives you the impression that Israel is a democracy?
It's a religious state where only Jews are allowed certain rights - look it up!!!
Now if you said democracy for Jews in Israel, you probably are right. But what about the Christians, Muslims and others living there? What about the rights and liberties of the oppressed in the West Bank where Israel has illegally occupied land and is usurping water rights of the indigenous population?
Israel democracy - outright mendacity and an oxymoron to boot.
To expand your point, there's no real democratic spirit there when there's so little respect for other humans.
I know it's a bit off topic, but the United States is not a democracy either. Sure, we vote for leaders, but those leaders have been carefully screened and vetted by the oligarchs who run this country. Most Americans don't vote because they know it doesn't really matter who is elected. I've gone back and forth with my beliefs on this, but after 8 years of George W. Bush, the worst president in our history, and then the excitement I felt as we elected this young, progressive, intelligent maybe even "socialist" president Obama - only to see that nothing is different. We hear the same rhetoric and the US is on the very same path it has been for the past 8 years. So where is OUR democracy? Forget about the rest of the world.
{the army lieutenant came up to me, rifle over his shoulder. "We are persuading these elements that we are having a democracy in Iran," he told me. "But democracy is for people who know their own intentions. Iranian people don't know what they want. Democracy will not work here. People should be educated, then they know what they want. Don't you believe that?"}
the young soldier must have received his education in the united states...
...peace...
Now this is a excellent article! listen to all of the various opinions and justifications for voting from those interviewed. Listen to the contradictions in logic as people express their political views. Or how Fisk articulates some just showed up for the parades but had no intention of voting.
And look how Fisk’s subtly pointed narrative draws the Western reader into the mix, as if they are experiencing Fisk’s journey in the first person. And look at the suggestion that the mob appeal and street events may be more about campaigning than a reflection of the actual percentages of votes, or how Fisk implies this upspring is largely reflective of a particular affluence in Iranian society both in Iran and in the Diaspora. Which contradicts the more common theme, which argued the street crowds equaled the majority.
Peace.
This is a good article, but I find it patronising, nonetheless. (Shrug)
Thanks.
Israel? I see people discussing Israel in this page's posts and the fact that there are not equal rights for all citizens or residents of Israel is ..., well, fact. The following article, which I haven't read in its entirety, certainly is fitting.
"Israel Cracks Down on Minority Rights",
by Mel Frykberg, IPS, June 8, 2009
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=54991
EXCERPT:
RAMALLAH, Jun 8, 2009 (IPS) - Three bills recently making the rounds in the Israeli parliament have caused outrage amongst Israel's Arab minority.
"They reveal an obscene and dangerous targeting of the individual and collective rights of Palestinian citizens," the independent BADIL Resource Centre for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights in Israel said in a press release.
One bill sought to prohibit marking the day Israel declared its independence as a day of mourning. A second prohibits negating the existence of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.
The third bill would have required Israeli citizens, including Arabs of Palestinian descent, to sign oaths of loyalty to the state, its flag and national anthem, and to perform military or civil service.
The first bill passed its first sitting by the ministerial committee of the Knesset (parliament) but was ultimately watered down. This bill would have outlawed Israeli Arabs commemorating the Nakba, or Catastrophe, with a day of mourning. The punishment would be three years imprisonment.
Nakba day, May 15, is the day after the British mandate over Palestine ended in 1948 and the day Israel was established. During the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 hundreds of thousands of Palestinians either fled or were driven out of their homes and villages by Israel's military. Over 500 Palestinian villages were razed to make way for Jewish towns and settlements.
On Nakba day Palestinians in the occupied territories, and their Israeli-Arab brethren in Israel proper, march through destroyed villages in remembrance of the ethnic expulsion.
The anti-Nakba bill was formulated by extremist Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu party. Lieberman has been criticised as a choice of foreign minister for advocating the expulsion of some Israeli Arabs from villages in northern Israel to the Palestinian territories.
After legal considerations were taken into account, the bill was softened to ban any Nakba events being supported by state funds.
...
The Higher Arab Monitoring Committee called the spate of bills "racist and fascist proposals aimed against the Arab public in Israel."
"The bills require the Arab minority to deny its history and Arab-Palestinian identity on one hand, and to identify with Zionist values that negate its national identity on the other," wrote committee chairman Mohammad Zeidan in a letter of protest to the Israeli government.
END OF EXCERPT
The article says plenty more of importance.
"iowablackbird June 13th, 2009 3:07 pm
...
the young soldier must have received his education in the united states..."
THAT is a rather conceited perspective or assumption; or both. The USA doesn't have the best quality education in the world, but does have some good professors and schools. It's conceited, however, to think or pretend that Iranians in Iran don't receive quality education, that they don't know what democracy is, or that the U.S. invented the system, one that does not really exist in the USA, which claims to be a democracy. Rather, it's like Bush Jr said of the Constitution of the USA when asked about this during the run-up politics to the war on Iraq and Bush replied that the Constitution is "only a piece of paper". That's about all there really is to say about democracy in the USA, too; it's only on paper.
There's a little, a tad more than that for democracy in the USA, but the population of voters certainly don't help to make democracy substantially real in the USA; instead, constantly pretending that they need to choose between "a lesser of two evils", without being able to prove that the lesser is indeed lesser, and that evil is not evil.
There was a discussion presented on Canal Savoir, which is a tv station out of (I think) the University of Laval, some French university in Quebec, anyway, and it was about democracy in Quebec and/or Canada. The speaker said that there officially is democracy here, but it's very meaningless because of the population of voters. The voters act as if all it takes to be a democracy is to go vote whenever it's an election, vote-casting day, and this is far from what's needed for there to really be democracy in a society and government. The population does nothing while its government erodes, corrodes, corrupts, ... the democratic basis of the society.
The faults found in the populations of voters in the USA and Canada are rather quite the same, I believe. They both fail in similar or identical ways. And the voters have similar governments; not democratic and just, but fascist, corporatist, imperialist, colonialist, ....
Just because Canada, in terms of government and human population, is much smaller than the USA, this doesn't mean that they don't have very common failings, which is a light way of calling the social and political disease status that exists.
"Israel? I see people discussing Israel in this page's posts and the fact that there are not equal rights for all citizens or residents of Israel is ..., well, fact."
I would add that another two blatantly discriminatory policies are the Law of Return and the Jewish National Fund.
The Law of Return gives Jews, those of Jewish ancestry, and their spouses the right to migrate to and settle in Israel and gain citizenship.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return
The Jewish National Fund's charter specifies that the purpose of the JNF is to purchase land (mainly seized from Arabs) for the settlement of Jews, which is interpreted to mean that JNF should not lease land to non-Jews.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_National_Fund
Democracy in action.
The Western Spin will be that the election was stolen, which would make it like the US in 2000 & 2004.
Were those elections democracy?
Paradoxically, the Neocon forces that would have liked to see hardliner Ahmadinejad defeated potentiated his reelection with threats & bellicosity in recent years and months. The mosque attack last week...moderate's voices become whispers in fights.
Definitely the western spin will be that the election was stolen, that the democratic process was subverted, and thus, we have every right to go in there and save the people of Iran... again. So, the way it is going to play out is either we will arm the opposition and encourage a civil war which will destabilize the country, keep arms suppliers rolling in those Iranian bucks for several years, making them even richer than they are now, or we will determine that Iran has no ability to strike back and just bomb the hell out of them, again, making arms contractors happy because those bombs aren't cheap either. Either way, Iran is an important piece in the neocon dream of total US control of the Middle East. We can not have an independently acting Iran for our dream of world domination to succeed. Just sit back and watch the spin as the American people are sold justifications for why we need to deal with Iran over the summer. In September or October, something will happen.
Iran has been and will remain the leading power in the Middle East for the forseeable future. Thank Lil' Bush and his gang of neocon imperialists' wars against Iraq and Afghanistan for that distinction.
This is not only displeasing to the US/Israeli Axis, it also is unsettling to the Saudis, Egyptians, and Turks all of whom are threatened by political factions motivated by religious extremism in their own domestic politics.
The reelection of Ahmadinejad gives the American/Israeli axis the gold-plated excuse it needs to think the unthinkable (how are we going to cripple the country and its nuclear industry with a preemptive--possibly nuclear?-- attack as a way to make sure the "right people" are running Iran).
It could also provide the impetus for the unity that has eluded all Arabic peoples (which neither the Iranians nor the Turks are)--a unified front from the Gulf to the Western Mediterainian. If either happens (and either one could lead to the other occuring), as Fisk is fond of saying, "watch out".
Poet
Sioux Rose
POET: Excellent points. I was relieved in Obama winning ONLY in that I presumed unlike McCain, he would use diplomacy to ward off violent confrontation with Iran. Like everyone but the most drugged or brain dead in this forum, I now see that the same policies are "on schedule" but merely given a kinder, gentler (?), more suave voice and pulpit from which to execute them. I pray the cosmos step in to prevent any aggressive actions against Iran/Persia.
POET, that 1st paragraph of yours is so dead on.
Mccain would have attacked Iran already. His campaign manager, Rick Davis, was in Georgia, in an international conflict, a WAR, when Johnny was still just a presidiential CANDIDATE! Idiot. Could. Not. Wait.
I don't recall any other pol in US history being embroiled in a War during an election campaign. Of course you could say Rick Davis and McCain were not the same two people, but that would be criminally disingeneous.
mccain sashkaavili davis israel georgia WAR. I'm personally 100% ecstatic mccain and the wolf-shooter are not on the throne. This has nothing to do with seeing that OBAMA SUCKS.
But war with Russia, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Waziristan simultaneously? McCain was off and running, Russia first. Pathetic aggresive traitor to his wife.