The Politics Behind the Candidates in Iran

As you know, prior to election in Iran, I wrote in our blog that I did not believe that anything good will come as a result of the current election. Looking at the Guardian Council's decision of selecting Ahmadinejad for president, I would have preferred a one candidate election. Why put all these old revolutionaries who have profited from the Islamic regime on the stand to run for president, when at the end of the day the average Iranian has no say in the election?

Unfortunately, absolute power corrupts absolutely under any regime. This is evident in today's Iran more than ever. As the election debates took shape the week before the election, the profiteering of Muslim ex-revolutionaries became obvious. In the debates Mr. Ahmadenijad accused the reformers of systematic theft and looting of nations wealth by reform candidates and its supporters. I was surprised that why a sitting president that had this information for 4 years while being in office did nothing about it until election night. Why Aytolah Khamenai would give these men the right to run for election if they or the immediate family had done some of these looting. For the average Iranian it has been obvious for years that Rafsanjani and Karubi had enriched themselves with public wealth. Still for many this was an awakening to see beyond the mask of religion and billions that these folks have taken from the Iranian nation's wealth. It is clear that ideologies are served for the masses while mass looting of country's wealth has taken place over the past 30 years under these old guards.

For folks that are not familiar with the Iranian factions, let's be clear that all these old men do not represent anything new. The two main characters in this battle are not Mousavi and Ahmadenajad, but Rafsanjani and Khomeini who are old guards of the revolution. Since they are old, they are no longer fighting for power for themselves. They are guarding the nepotistic ideals so that the sons and daughters of these revolutionaries can benefit from continued control over the government and its resources and maintain the nepotistic lines of governance.

Iran's hope for theological democracy under Islam was put to rest under the previous leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khatami, the president of Iran prior to Ahmadinejad. Unfortunately because of the divisions within the reform movement at the time the reform movement was put to rest at the voter level. After the first four-year term of president Khatami, the same revolutionary guards insured that the reform in Iran politics does not happen. How did this happen? They simply banned sitting member of the parliament from running in subsequent terms. They became disenfranchised. These parliamentary elected officials no longer met the needs of the Islamic Republic ruling dictators Rafsanjani and Khomeini. They got forced out of politics.

In his second term, president Khatami used his executive power to open news papers and magazines, and soon hundreds of news papers flourished in Iran. With the selection of Ahmadinejad as president, these magazines and voices again became disenfranchised and were quickly shut down. Many reformers got barred from journalism. As I have stated in my book, the supreme leader and the clergy system in Iran controls who is allowed to run based on a selection of old revolutionaries and mullahs out of Qom. This is effectively a one party system.

As I was watching the election, I thought what must have been shocking to the viewers from the West was the absence of a forum for a challenger to regroup and be able to mobilize its base. Mr. Mousavi and his supporters could only go to the streets to voice their opposition towards the election in illegal rallies. No political party in the parliament was visible to voice a challenge, or unite and plan for the next election. By the design the government has placed an executive judicial and parliamentary system that is full of yes men, and that follows the orders of the regime. No other voice can be heard in Iran, and even if it could, it would be dealt with brute force.

This video shows how the current leaders 20 years ago supported each other and to the opposition of senior clergy at the time sidelined Aytollah Montazeri. Grand Aytollah Montazeri in Iran during the Iran-Iraq war was always expected in the 80's to replace Aytollah Khamanei. Montazeri spent 5 years in jail himself. He was sidelined because he did not believe in Islamic republic that did not represent democratic ideals of the masses. He also protested against the wave of execution that the Islamic republic committed against the voice of opposition views in Iran.

Now as the same Guardian Council and mullahs have reclaimed power at the expense of the current generation of youth in Iran, the question is- Where does Iran reform movement go from this point?

The options are clear. First, the nepotistic revolutionary leaders will not give up the wealth that their families have made. They will not surrender the thrown or loose respect for the crimes of looting that their daddies did in the country. They will continue to fight each other as the losing party may end up hung or expelled from the country. The last real leader Iran had after the death of Ayatollah Khomeini was Grand Ayatollah Montazeri. In the 80s when I attended the Friday prayers with my parents and I remember the laud orchestrated chants that Ayatollah Montazeri was the hope of Iran. He had lost three kids as martyrs to establishing the regime and was the Ayatollah Khomeini's exiled partner. He was quickly sidelined by Rafsanjani and Khamenei at the time, and after the death of Ayatollah Khomeini, he was no longer a figure in the Iranian government and was put under house arrest and silenced. Even though he was a great revolutionary responsible for carrying the torch since he believed in open government with each Iranian having a voice, he was sidelined for the strict conservatives to rule.

This was fine for the neoconservatives in the White House at the time since they wanted a fundamental religious government in Iran. Remember that it was during the Reagan years that the Iran-Contra scandal broke out and the CIA funded sales of guns to Iran by importing cocaine into the U.S. The Reagan's neoconservatives even negotiated with the Islamic regime to keep the hostages for 444 days so that it would kill President Carter's chance of reelection and they got conveniently released when Reagan took office.

The fact is that the neoconservatives and the religious conservative government in Iran are not after ideologies. They use ideologies for the masses only to mold the public opinion. As the end goal is power, no amount of power is sufficient for these folks. They are happy to change ideologies and viewpoints in order to reach the end goal. For the conservatives in the white house at the time the end goal is dominance over nation wealth.

Before the election the neoconservatives hoped that Iran would select Ahmadenijad. Why? Because it would create the next war for them to be engaged in and control a population rich in culture and resources to create more military bases and to have the next war to fund the military industrial complex that relies on its base of support. The neoconservatives like senator McCain do not have the interests of the people of Iran in mind. They are encouraging actions that would help Ahmadenijad. They are OK with the concept of Iranians killing Iranians indefinitely, just like they have been OK with funding both sides of the Iran-Iraq war. Additionally, it gives a reason to the hawks in Israel to buy more guns with the U.S. tax payer's dollars and use them in Iran. That will draw the U.S. into a fight with Iran and send my fellow Iranians back to the dark ages, very similar to what happened in Iraq. Remember that in Iraq, after the first war, the same neoconservatives told the Shiite majority that they would support the uprising and at the end they sat by the sidelines while Iraq military crushed the Shiite majority in the south in the most brutal way possible. Besides the next war and a permanent military base in Iran they have no other agenda. With that base established, they can run heroin out of the golden triangle all the way to Afghanistan, Iran and Kurdistan to fund the next dictator for another war. Therefore the cycle of violence between nations continues and they all profit from it.

Iranian government has used this to its full advantage to clamp down on its own people. You see for the Iranian revolutionaries it is better if the Israel does attack the nuclear development infrastructure. The conservative government can again consolidate power by reminding of the great evils outside of Iran's borders. By having Israil attack they can continue to use the military to suppress all opposition.

Civil disobedience is the path to Iran's future:

In Iran the concept of civil disobedience to this regime must take hold. You cannot bring a change in government with setting buildings on fire or throwing rocks. At the end, this level of violence only hurts the Iranians. In this regard I refer to the Iranians in the Basij, the revolutionary guard and the student protesters who are all mostly under 30 years of age. These young men and women represent the next generation of great Iranian minds that will be lost in such protests. The sons of the elite that rule with an ironed fist will not be impacted as they have taken the wealth of the nation to offshore bank accounts. We will only lose the poor, the middle class and other valuable Iranians to street protest.

The leaders who can possibly lead the country out of this mess such as Khatami or Mousavi are sidelined and it erodes the base of support for them if this violence continues. Continuation of violence is not what these leaders are asking for. What course of action should the average Iranian take?

The one course is the logical path for the resistance to any oppressor and that is nonviolent civil disobedience and resistance. For this we should only look at how the French are able to shut down the government by taking on peaceful strikes. Recently the union of Iranian bus drivers went on strike. This form of disobedience is the best form of resistance against tyranny. If doctors, city employees, nurses, lawyers called national strikes it would bring the ruling regime to its knees. National strikes combined with the shouts of Allah Akbar on rooftops will force this government to change without the need for another stone being thrown or innocent protester being shot in a violent act. This form of unrest is the course for all Iranians.

The demand for these protests needs to be clear: to establish political parties in Iran, open access to media, and stop filtering of election candidates by the religious theocracy. Non of this can happen without having fair elections held in the country. If the Iranian Majles (parliament) members that are still have some allegiance to the reform movement need to make the above issues and the fair elections its daily priority. See the latest video from the Iranian parliament.

In regards to the U.S. politics towards the region, I hope that President Obama continues with the current stand offish approach, as any sign of threat by the West will only be used to again consolidate power by the Islamic regime, commit mass genocide by purging the anti revolutionaries, and create the next wave of exile of war refugees in Iran. Of course this is the course that Israel would love to see since they would then be able to receive the green light to attack Iran. See the videos attached on the site link bellow.

As I watched the Shell and Chevron clean energy commercials in between broadcasts of CNN and Fox on Iran, I wondered how the media will portray things in Iran over the next few months. I have been going through the latest videos on YouTube each night looking for new materials that I could post on our site. To my amazement hundreds of new videos appear each night on YouTube. When I look at these gruesome images, my heart melts and I am deeply saddened to see them. The fact is that many new posts are not new but recycled from previous days and cut over with music and revolutionary slogans in order to increase the passion of the youth of Iran to continue the street fights and protests. The LA Iranians that left as part of the old regime all want to portray the current government as more violent than the Shah so they can put Mr. Pahlavi to rule once again and repaint him as a less violent king than the religious conservatives.

The U.S. news coverage has been amazing in regards to this election with no coverage of Haiti or the Moroccan election that took place. They keep recirculation of Iran videos as new footage. Is this because the oil companies are now buying more advertisements on these media outlets since they would be the first to benefit from the next war? Are the advertisement sales department and the editor's desk in cahoots to serve content that they can get large corporate sponsors for? I am sure that is the case. This is similar to the case of the war generals and analysts working for the media who remained on the U.S. government payroll. The media did not only look the other way but acted to pass the war propaganda to the masses on behalf of the government. Are they now getting extra advertisement dollars from the oil companies when they keep running the same footage of carnage again and again on TV? Or is it because of the heavy hand of the AIPAC Zionists and the religious conservatives with the help of the U.S. tax payers' money that is funding these continues reruns of the violence in Iran. So I would expect that over the next few months as the public opinion is shaped by these broadcasters on how evil Iran is they hope to force President Obama to change course and give Israel permission to attack Iran.

In the above scenario, the Ahmadinejads are victorious since they can once again claim power and say -- I told you so, this reform movement is from the expatriates and Israel so let's all rally around the flag, country and god and defend the nation. Finally, millions of Iranian lives will be lost defending the country but to the benefit of the neoconservatives and the nepotistic kings and princes of the region.

While Iranians die to drum beats of another war, the military industrial complex benefits from selling guns, and the oil companies from looting the Iranian wealth. The sons of these current leaders will than take residence in friendly countries with the wealth that they looted from Iran.

A site dedicated to social justice from around the globe. With the single focus of helping to build similarities from different races and cultures. By helping to highlight the plight of humanity by our collective shared experience of dealing with poverty, war, racism and social injustice. Iranian-American author Vahid Razavi and his dedicated team from Belgrade Serbia covering global issues from Iran, Middle East, US and the Balkans.
http://theageofnepotism.com/2009/07/the-politics-behind-the-candidates-in-iran/#more-786

E-mail Comment Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Furl

The Rationale Behind Military Interventions And The Analysis Of Ethnic Conflict Regulation Mechanism

1. Introduction

i. Conflict situations are situations of dynamic complexity. In order to solve the problem we will focus on understanding and representing the dynamics of a system. We will describe interactions among social structures and review processes in complex situations utilizing system dynamics. We will use causal loops identifying main elements and their interconnections focusing on feedback loops that will help explain system behavior.

ii. The main purpose of this article is to express as straightforwardly as possible a few key ideas and therefore bring forth more clearly the logic of reasoning, and in particular the assumptions being made concerning the interdependence of social networks and furthermore to exploit the possibilities of the application of system thinking and system dynamics in order to prevent military interventions. In addition we will question the rationale behind military intervention in the Western Balkans.

iii. A growing number of international conflicts represent a major challenge to international organizations. The track record of international community interventions shows that it is necessary to use additional analytical tools to apply different strategies for conflict solving; system dynamics and system thinking.

iv. Resistance to System Thinking in Conflict Situations is well known: Usually key players in conflicts situations are resistant to system thinking. The introduction of System Dynamics involves the overcoming of these resistances.

v. System Dynamics will contribute in increasing the awareness needed to deal with conflict in deal making.

vi. In order to understand international conflicts in it is important to understand that each conflict is a two stage process consisting of:

The Pre-conflict Phase - The interrelationship among actors in a group. These same actors develop and later on are referred to as opponents. This model will describe group dynamics and the process from group mobilization to group action.

The Conflict Phase: Once the groups are in action there are different constraints that arise such as internal support, resources and availability of resources, military action, and international military action.

2. The Pre-conflict Phase

vii. Ethnic Conflicts: Max Weber states that ethnic groups are those human groups that entertain a subjective belief in their common descent... [which] must be important for the propagation of group formation's. Group differences then produce different social dynamic patterns. If this would escalate then we would describe this is an ethnic conflict.

viii. We will assume that ethnic identity is not changed often, however different importance might be assigned to different values over time. If the relative importance of ethnic identity is raised then this can be described as mobilization. Our model will consider technical progress that enables increased contact among the groups, the position of a group in the society, nd the leadership role that is involved.

ix. If increased mobilization evolves into an action it will depend on different factors such as a societal climate for change, or the leadership of ethnic entrepreneurs resulting from available resources, external influences, and other high-profile triggering events, etc.

x. Action depends not only on the characterization of the initial group but on the opposite side as well, this is especially true concerning the level of democracy, with transitional states being most conflict-prone, as well as the level of previous violence, which increases the probability of violent response.

xi. Key components are as follows:

- Political issues: bilateral issues in different areas, refugees, territorial and resource claims, support for separatist movements, government ideology, human rights, military involvement, political crime. - Economic Factors: energy, food, strategic resources, differences between south and north. - Ethnic Relationship: racial attitude, religion, culture. - Defense Capabilities: degree of militarization, weapons, mobilization potential.

xii. Ethnic, Economic and Political Differences will lead to stronger group actions. Moreover democracy will negatively influence the action planned by different groups. Successful actions will usually influence better self perception of a group. Furthermore ethnic differences will help each group develop its own identity. In the case a group being considered a nation (e.g. Balkan Wars) the boundaries between nations would lead to stronger government support and the furthering of group mobilization.

3. Pre conflict phase: Case Study of Western Balkans

xiii. The framework described matches experiences with conflicts in the ex-Yugoslavia. Its six republics were bounded by historical and ethnic reasons. Before 1991 Yugoslavia was under communist rule by President Tito. In 1990 Tito died, the economic situation deteriorated, the Soviet block democratized, and Milosevic became party chief in Serbia. Independence then became the political goal for Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Macedonia.

xiv. Western Balkans Background:

- Multiple ethnic conflicts in Macedonia, Kosovo, Bosnia, Serbia, etc. - Political and Economic Instability (Transition Economies) - Multiple Strategies by different international organizations

4. Conflict Phase

xv. It is important to track the dynamics of conflict. Moreover the coordination of different sets of players is crucial.

xvi. The model will describe internal and external influences and also their interconnections. To illustrate the theory of lateral pressure will be used in international relationships. This theory defines that internal sources of conflict leads to potentials for external conflict and that this further depends on the population, level of technology, and access to resources.

xvii. In our model we see that resources have a positive influence on military actions and military action has a negative influence on the amount of resources. SDM will help in understanding possible and probable outcomes of conflict situations and will help in preventing unintended consequences uncovering hidden dynamics drive pre conflict dynamics in shaping the conflict phase.

xviii. Furthermore a hypothesis is represented that when resources decline while providing the population technological growth the result is an increase in the level of internal pressure. Sustained stress will lead to violence and moreover impacts the preliminary reasons for conflict. In addition increases in both technology and population influences external pressure and will therefore cause international conflict.

xix. Then further assumptions are marked. We see that an increase in technology and population will have a positive influence on GDP. GDP will then influence the military budget and this will usually lead to higher military spending and military action. When resources are limited international conflict and violence will lead to a lower labor force and worsening technology and result in a decline in the GDP. It is evident that this system is stable no matter the suffering of the population, and that the causes of each war are catastrophic. We must then conclude that military intervention would have a negative influence on GDP and that military action is necessary in the short term perspective.

5. Intervention of International Organizations in the Western Balkans and the Rationale Behind Military Action

xx. Classical Mechanisms of International Organizations: Structure a framework in which incentives for cooperation will outweigh the benefits from violent actions and confrontations.

In this instance we will use Schneckener's approach that is driven by a distinction between acceptable and unacceptable policies aimed at settling ethnic conflicts. Elimination strategies comprise genocide, ethnic cleansing, and forced assimilation; control regimes include coercive domination, co-opted rule, and limited self-rule. Besides the unacceptable policies there are policies of recognition.

Elimination Control Recognition

Genocide/ ethnocide Ethnic cleansing Forced assimilation

Coercive domination Co-opted rule Limited self-rule

Domestic and international minority rights regimes (MRR) Integrative/consociation power-sharing (PS) Territorial solutions (TS) Bi-/Multilateral regimes (BMR)

xxi. International Organizations used the following approaches in Western Balkans

MRR PS TS BMR Dayton - Bosnia, Kosovo UNSCR 1244, Macedonia Ohrid Agreement

xxii. International Organizations have been successful in the long run because they have used recognition strategies. In system dynamics terms this would imply:

- a higher level of democracy - lower political differences - lower economic differences (financial aid)

xxiii. However the main question remains whether they would be successful with the NATO interventions in 1995 and especially in 1999. The Model presented is a straightforward reply to this question.

6. Conclusion

xxiv. We have shown that recognition strategies can be successful in the long term. However there is still a need for military intervention providing that civil rights are not respected and people are suffering in order to secure a short term prospect of situational well being.