Normally I wouldn't comment on Iran; what happens there is none of my business. But the whole post-election mess there has me wondering.
You see, it looks very much like a "color revolution" scenario: the US-favored candidate contests election results, claims victory, and his supporters riot till the government caves in. But then, couldn't the incumbent actually steal the election knowing full well that he can paint the resulting opposition protests as a CIA/NED coup attempt, whether that is actually true or not?
I freely admit that I haven't a clue what's actually true in the reports coming from Iran, whether Ahmadinejad or Mousavi actually won the vote, who stole what (or not). Given the track record of the mainstream Western media when it comes to the Balkans (as a rule, their reports are almost entirely false), why should I believe anything they say about Iran? Especially since the Empire is so determined to have a war with Tehran, one way or another.
The fact remains, however, that the technique of "democratic coup" pioneered by the Empire in Serbia - and applied elsewhere since - has made it effectively impossible to judge whether any election, anywhere, is actually legitimate. Even if we somehow possessed the knowledge to make an informed decision, there is still the matter of the Empire insisting that democracy is whatever it says it is. As a consequence, "democracy" has become just about meaningless. And that, regardless of what happens in Iran, is something definitely worth thinking about...
Update: Daniel Larison at AmCon offers some thoughts in a similar vein. Worth reading.
Update II: (6/19/2009) And here is Daniel McAdams at the LRC blog, confirming that the NED is involved, after all...
5 comments:
The real power in Iran is concentrated within the clique of Shi'a ayatollahs, it does not matter who won the elections.
Dear GF, I also thought from the start that in Iran there's some post-election event similar to the infamous October 5, 2000 coup going on. Still, we will see what the Ayatollah comes up with. He could very well decide who gets or stays in power. In any case, let's go back to the plight of the Serbs as that's far tougher than others!
Both points are well taken; however, the purpose of the post was to point out that the "colored revolutions" have poisoned the well of democracy to the point where one can't decide if something is real, or a coup. Given that the mainstream media are already calling this the "Green Revolution," I think that was a pretty important observation.
"... And here is Daniel McAdams at the LRC blog, confirming that the NED is involved, after all... "
Mighty interesting. And predictable ... if it looks like a duck, flies like a duck and quacks like a duck, it _is_ a duck...
Today's Asia Times article http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KF20Ak03.html titled "Beijing cautions US over Iran" by former Indian ambassador M. K. Bhadrakumar provides an informed insight into the Iranian internal politics.
Ahmedinejad and Ayatollah Khamenei (interestingly, the latter is a former student of Moscow's Patrice Lumumba University) represent republicanism, up against extreme theocratic designs of mullahs with Mousavi up front and Rafsanjani behind. Beijing has finally made clear its views, while Washington is fishing in murky waters at best. The article concludes:
"... Alas, the political class in Washington is clueless about the Byzantine world of Iranian clergy. Egged on by the Israeli lobby, it is obsessed with "regime change". The temptation will be to engineer a "color revolution". But the consequence will be far worse than what obtains in Ukraine. Iran is a regional power and the debris will fall all over. The US today has neither the clout nor the stamina to stem the lava flow of a volcanic eruption triggered by a color revolution that may spill over Iran's borders. "
Post a Comment