(image credit: BBC News)


Some two weeks after the Iranian election, the crisis continues.  The charges of fraud have not let up, and new detailed studies seem to show great inconsistencies in the electoral count.  The official Iranian vote overseers, the 12-member Guardian Council, admitted that in fifty districts, voter turnout was listed as over 100% of registered voters, a physical impossibility, resulting in three million “extra” votes recorded for current president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (Robert Dreyfuss, The Nation, “The Next Explosion in Iran” 21 June 2009).

Because the margin between Ahmadinejad, the reported winner, and Mir Hossein Mousavi, the second-place candidate, was over three million, however, the Guardian Council announced that this did not constitute major election fraud and would not result in annulment of the election as former Prime Minister Mousavi had demanded. 

Inside Iran, powerful people are speaking up against a backdrop of violence and protest on the streets, including Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani and former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, a leading member of the Assembly of Experts.  This situation has begun to divide the ruling clerical elite.  Some reports say that Ayatollah Ali Khameini’s position as “Supreme Leader,” a position determined by the Assembly of Experts, may even be at risk.  In the interim, however, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been announced as the winner, and is slated to be inaugurated between late July and mid-August.  This is later than usual, and may provide room for maneuver, if the Assembly of Experts and the Guardian Council feel they require it. 

World reaction has been almost uniformly negative, especially to the shooting of some nineteen or more peaceful demonstrators in the street, including one 26-year-old woman, Neda Sultani, who has been seen by millions in a heart-rending amateur video, shot and bleeding on the street as a bystander to the demonstrations.  Her death has become a symbol, and Iranian opposition leaders have called for the world to show its grief for the fallen, including Neda Sultani, in prayer and street processions on Friday, June 26.  Such demonstrations are apparently being planned in many countries, and there have been rallies from Paris to Kuala Lumpur.

A joint study by UK think tank Chatham House and the University of St. Andrew’s Institute of Iranian Studies investigated the election results.  They compared the 2005 election, when Ahmadinejad won, with 2009. They concluded that, in order to attain the 24.5 million recorded votes in 2009 for Ahmadinejad, he would have had to receive all 11.5 million votes he received in 2005, as well as all 10.5 million new voters and 2.5 million reformist voters. They concluded: “Is this possible? Yes. Is it likely? The report doubts it.”  View the full 19-page report from Chatham House.

The grave situation begs the question:  What should the U.S. and the international community’s response be? 

President Obama has been very measured in his response, not seeking to add to the violence of the government’s response by providing any excuse of interference.  However, by the time of his June 23 White House press conference, the President hardened his tone in response to the repression. 

He declared:  “I am appalled and outraged by the threats, beatings, and imprisonments of the past few days.” He noted the “heart-breaking” images coming out of Iran, specifically noting the case of Neda Sultani’s murder, and added:  “We also know this: Those who stand up for justice are always on the right side of history.” But so far, President Obama has not spelled out specific steps for the US to take.  He may await indication of any change in Iranian leaders’ approach, before such a decision.

Several major European countries have condemned the violence, and some have opened their embassy doors so that wounded protesters could receive medical treatment. NGOs, including Amnesty International, are keeping track of arrests and detentions which total over 500, possibly many more, including many journalists and leaders of opposition groups.

But repression can only go so far, before becoming highly counter-productive. The question begins to arise:  What next for the Iranian Islamic Republic? 
 
Questions to keep in mind:  Has the government lost the trust and support of some of the key groups and classes that brought it to power?  This was a populist revolution against an unpopular dictator, the Shah of Iran.  Yet now, cries of “Where is my vote?” and “death to the dictator” are heard.  Working-class Iranians are hurting economically.  Many women and young people are angry and distressed at both the lack of human rights, especially for women, and the lack of jobs, even for educated professionals.  Many middle-class people, who have never been activists, are now deeply involved in the opposition, whether in the streets, on blogs, or quietly at home.  Whatever the actual vote count, this has gone beyond elections alone, to the issue of:  What is the Iranian Islamic Republic, and how will the will of its people become manifest?

Our concern at the Project for Nuclear Awareness is for two things:  Our main mission is to help rid the world of nuclear weapons threats, whether in Iran, China, or for that matter, the U.S. as well.  We are totally “non-partisan” in that respect.  In respect to human rights, the right of people to vote for their leaders, to participate peacefully in their country’s civil society, the right of all men and women to be equal before the law, the answer is yes, yes, and yes—we support freedom for people everywhere. In respecting those rights for all, we are totally non-partisan as well.

Right now, the President, the U.S. administration, and many European and international leaders are walking a fine line.  They do not want to intervene in Iranian internal politics; but the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights goes beyond partisanship, to codify universal rights, which the Iranian administration must also respect, whoever emerges as the leadership in the Islamic Republic.  It is the duty of world leaders, as noted by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon early this week, to support and enforce human rights wherever they are threatened by actions which violate international commitments. 

On the nuclear front, we support a broad opening in the Middle East, whereby all parties come together to talk about new solutions, a new regime of nuclear disarmament.  This can lead over time to a Nuclear-Weapons-Free Middle East, which is in the best interests of Iran, Israel, Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and all powers in the region. 

Will the Iranian people see a redress of their grievances?  Will there be a just outcome to a critical situation?  Only time will tell.  One thing is certain, and that is that right now, the whole world is watching Iran, for some answers.

Related Media

Events

NUCLEAR AND SPACE POLICY BRIEFING- A Roadmap for 2009
Our Feb. 5, 2009 briefing featured Jofi Joseph, Senator Casey's top foreign policy advisor, and other experts.  View

Articles

PNA International Video Forum with Students and Hans Blix
Jennifer Lin of The Philadelphia Inquirer attended the International Dialogue with Dr. Blix and Ambassador Graham. Read her article on the event.  The forum with HANS BLIX, TOM GRAHAM, and PNA'S CRAIG EISENDRATH and EMILY GLEASON took place at Chestnut Hill College, and included students in the US, Canada, and Mexico. It is the first in a series of PNA and student-sponsored conferences.  View

Videos

Bombed by 67 Nukes
Senator Abacca Anjain Madisson of Rongelap, Marshall Islands, describes how her country was struck by 67 nuclear weapons during Pacific Islands testing by the United States.  View