| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| Don't underestimate the weakness of Iran's theocracy |
| 2006-05-10 |
| More about Abbas Fakhravar, and Iranian dissident who has been in the news lately, contained in an op ed. I thought it was worth discussing. Excerpts: Yet, in assessing these risks, insufficient attention is paid to the fundamental weaknesses of the opponent. The first is ideological. In the 27 years since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has come full circle. The religious fervour of Khomeini gave way to Rafsanjani's economic pragmatism, which was in turn succeeded by mild liberalisation under Khatami. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who became president last August, is attempting to turn the clock back to 1979 at a time when the ayatollah's fanaticism is discredited and the population, two thirds of which was born since the revolution, hates its leaders for their oppression, corruption and incompetence. The second weakness has to do with political legitimacy. Loss of faith in the revolution calls into question the system of velayat-e faqih, or guardianship of the religious jurist, by which ultimate power lies not with elected representatives, but with the clergy. The mullahs' dominance seriously compromises Iran's democracy. For example, in parliamentary elections in 2004, the Council of Guardians, a clerically appointed body, barred about 2,500 reformist candidates from participating. A year later, the second round of the presidential poll was marred by widespread accusations of fraud. The third weakness, veiled by the near-doubling of oil revenues over the past two years, is economic. The revolution has failed to provide work for an overwhelmingly youthful population; unemployment is running at about 30 per cent. The regime clings to an outmoded model of import substitution through industrialisation, and things are likely to get worse under Ahmadinejad. Members of a supposedly pliant parliament have criticised the current budget as likely to bring higher inflation and joblessness and slower growth. The defiant rhetoric of Iran's leaders thus belies manifold fragility. Patrick Clawson, of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, has likened the regime to a vase balanced on a mantelpiece. How best, then, to tip it off? We need to tip it off before it's stabilized by a nuclear armed mullacracy. The obvious answer is from within, and here it is worth listening to a brave opposition voice recently forced to leave the country. Speaking to me by phone before his exile, Amir Abbas Fakhravar said the referral of Iran's nuclear dossier to the UN Security Council had been a cause of street celebrations in the capital and other major cities. I did not notice this in the news. And the riot police had not dared intervene. Such was the hatred of the regime, Mr Fakhravar said, that people were prepared to put up with economic sanctions, including an oil embargo, and even military strikes, if they led to its overthrow. Interesting that Fakhravar says that air strikes might be tolerable to the internal resistance. This foots with what Gerecht has written. Much of the Iranian opposition is anti-American so even if air strikes cause the nation to rally around anti-Americanism, it does not necessarily help the regime. Asked how this might be brought about, he said there was as yet no dissident leader within the country. Cue Pallavi and Hossein Khomenei?However, he spoke of a well-organised underground student movement and of the increase in strikes and demos against the government. There must be leaders if there are organizations. Otherwise, it's just a bull session with a bunch of college kids. Mr Abbas, 30, was sentenced to eight years in prison in 2002 for defaming the supreme clerical leadership in a book, This Place is Not a Ditch. Last year, he was allowed out of Evin jail to take a university exam. He went on the run and has recently escaped to a neighbouring Arab country. His assessment of the internal situation in Iran points to the wisdom of increasing foreign funding for propaganda. He said the extra $75 million requested by the Bush Administration from Congress for this purpose could best be spent on setting up a television station in a neighbouring country. It could also be used on scholarships for overseas study to help young Iranians understand the principles of democracy. The best criticism of the administration, IMO, is that this did not start sooner. $75MM is a rounding error in our federal budget and, unlike much government spending, this guy thinks it would have an impact. That would target the mullocracy's ideological and political weaknesses. As for the economy, Ahmadinejad's call last October for the destruction of Israel has already led to a flight of private investors from the Teheran stock market, and foreign capital will be deterred while the political situation remains so unstable. In contrast, equity markets in Iraq are booming.Even if Russia and China block sanctions at the UN, Iran would be hurt were the EU and Japan to join America in applying them; this vulnerability explains the vehemence of its reaction. I am still not sure what's going on there, and according to the papers, neither does the CIA. It seems though that we have roughly a year before we need to bomb (i.e. nuke program sufficiently advanced or next generation Russian SAMs deployed). In this year we should do our best to squeeze the regime financially and also create conditions in which the dissidents can become a real threat to the theocracy. I remain skeptical. However, as many have noted here, the recent saber rattling by Iran can easily be interpreted as a desparate bluff rather than a sign of confidence. Iran seems to know that this next year or so represents a window of vulnerablity before it can become a nuclear power and the leader of global militant Islam. IMO Amadinejad is a loose cannon and was not the Mullahs' first choice. However his utterings accurately reflect the worldview of the Mullahs and should not be ignored because his position has limited power. I think we Rantburgers should follow what Pallavi (Shah jr.) and Hossein Khomenei do over the next 3 months and hope for some meaningful sanctions even if it means token concessions to to keep the EU on board until the end of the year. It will be also interesting to track the activity of the Iranian minorities. There seems to be an uptick in activity in the non-Persian part of Iran. To me, this is a sign of weakness in the regime. It it is not clear that we are actively supporting these minority groups at this point in time. Lastly, IMO, even if by some miracle Iran falls peacefully Hezbollah must be destroyed. They are a threat to peace in Lebanon and a direct threat to the US and Israel. |
| Posted by:JAB |
| #7 I'll throw my two cents in: There isn't a national leader, and there won't be until the rural areas come around. Tehran and the rest of the urban areas can demonstrate all they want. The ranks of the Pasadran and the 'native' part of the Basij are from the countryside. There won't be a clear picture unless there's HUMINT and some intrepid reporters inside Iran. For example, the official unemployment estimate is 30%. It's likely much higher than that, perhaps even double in the younger age groups. At this point there's no clear way to find out. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2006-05-10 20:34 |
| #6 I think LH is right. Local protests could be confused or misrepresented as being linked to the UN referral. The Iranian dissidents often overstate their case so the media can be forgiven for not covering it, especially when there are few AP stringers roaming the Iranian hinterlands. By 'organization' I mean groups with an objective and strategy for achieving it rather than just throwing a demo here and there which is more akin to a temper tantrum. Even if this organization is local in nature it is more likely to join a united front if it has a longer term set of goals and somebody who can speak on behalf of the group. I agree that Iran is a tough nut to crack. I read Rantburg to get a better idea of what's going on and what the strategy should be. Based on what I've seen, there has been a tad bit of movement towards an organized, national resistance with credible leaders in the last 2 weeks, though it's still a hint. Pahlavi was very explicit about overthrowing the regime in the Human Events article. In the past he has been more circumspect. Now he's providing details. Hossein Khomenei has criticized the current regime but has not, to my knowledge, clearly stated what he thinks should happen. I think these two represent the best hope for a united national resistance leader who could then articulate demands and conditions to achieve human rights. Their ancestry gives them some credibility (and, of course, baggage) as national leaders, especially since neither has stated a desire to rule themselves. If any of the other groups were going to provide leadership it would have happened already. The reason I am so concerned about a national leader is that I think Pahlavi could almost triangulate between the evil Americans and corrupt Mullahs. In this scenario, he could say to the people (and select military units) "take to the streets, overthrow the mullahs, I'll lead a provisional government until we have true open elections, then we'll root out corruption and pursue our nuclear ambitions in a manner consistent with our treaty obligations. Otherwise, I'm worried that the Crazy Cowboy will mess up our country." We could then offer 'carrots'(like WTO membership, non aggression treaty, genuine manufacturer C-130 parts nuclear power tech, etc.) with reasonable conditions that would be acceptable to Pahlavi but not to the Mullahs. This is just an scenario I have been thinking about. I'm sure holes can be shot in it, but I am trying to be more realistic than some in the US who think Iran is ripe for a spontaneous pro-American student revolution against the Basji while still holding out hope we can avoid a war. Hopefully Pahlavi gets enough traction that we start to worry about Iranian intelligence having him killed. |
| Posted by: JAB 2006-05-10 18:16 |
| #5 I haven't RTWT, but does the article address the thousands of suicide boomer volunteers? Or the Basijibots? |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2006-05-10 16:01 |
| #4 did the demonstrations on hearing about the UNSC resolution take place, since we didnt hear about them? Maybe, maybe not. 1. In all likelihood a dissident exagerates what is happening. Weve seen that regularly from the Iranian opposition. 2. OTOH, western media isnt strong on the ground in Iran. Its an authoritarian society. If the demo doesnt happen outside the hotel windows in downtown Teheran, Im not sure the MSM hears about it. 3. Theres a certain amount of demos we DO hear about, relating to local economic issues and so on. Is it possible there was a spike in these, and the relationship to the UNSC res is impossible even for someone on the ground in Iran to discern? No leaders -well obviously theres somebody who manages to coordinate student strikes, and there are labor leaders who coordinate strikes, etc. I think this means there are no national leaders around whom the entire opposition could rally. Whether thats true or not, I dont know, but its consistent with localized protests. Not sure if theres even, say, a national student leadership, or if the students at individual campuses, for ex, just organize around a campus leadership. |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2006-05-10 15:51 |
| #3 An internal overthrow would be the best case scenerio, but it also might be wishfull thinking. Iran freaks me out because I can solve all the worlds problems without even trying, all except Iran. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2006-05-10 15:23 |
| #2 Weakness is defined by having Mullah heads on poles. Anything else is wishful thinking. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2006-05-10 14:20 |
| #1 I can’t imagine more than one generation living under theocratic rule. There again I aint Muslim and can’t possible understand them. I have seen video of the Iranian leaders at Friday morning prayer shouting “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” but not really offering a way to improve life for the average Iranian. Hatred can only be maintained for so long then people begin to wonder why they have this hate towards ________. Usually, people need a bit more to hang onto except the morning rant. Someday soon the oppressed people of the world will turn towards their leaders and demand: “Show me the Money!” If they can’t then they are finished. I wish the Shah well and may he have a good struggle. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2006-05-10 13:25 |