Critical Iran Eventualities & Nuances
Anyone with a basic knowledge of history and race knows that Iran is no Iraq. Persians are ethnically distinct from Arabs, and the population in Iran, mostly composed of people under 30 years old, is the most pro-western, educated, and sophisticated bunch in the Middle East. What’s more, they loathe and despise the Islamic regime and want it gone.
In fact, the people of Iran have not forgotten their close but short contemporary experience in the late 40s to early 50s, with democracy: the democratic, secular movement led by Dr. Mossadegh, the nationalistic popular leader. And even before that, the first Constitution in the entire Middle East was written around a 100-years ago by Constitutional revolutionaries in Iran who wanted to limit the powers of the Shah (King) through the establishment of the first parliamentary system of its kind in the greater region.
Yes, a religious dictatorship was imposed on Iran in 1979, but the Iranian people have not lost their identity, or their inherent creativity and intelligence. Nor have they lost their sense of history as descendants to a great civilization. In fact, the rulers of Iran today are considered by common people as "non-Persians", or they are referred to as the “2nd Arab Invasion” by regular Iranians. The people in Iran may sometimes seem too patient under dictatorship, persecution, and pressure until the pressure gets to the point of explosion. And when that occurs, they will use any opening, however small, to rise and stage a regime change. And you will not have a rebellion without conviction, or result once it does happen.
The reason for the sporadic nature of the protests so far is that the opposition has not united and gathered enough momentum to induce a solid and sure stage for the workers, women, ethnic minorities, students, etc. to all come out en masse in the streets with the intent to overthrow the Theocracy. However, there are now signs that the perfect storm may be starting to form.
Economic sanctions will help in creating more momentum for such a popular uprising, but they are not enough. There needs to be a united front, a unifying figure, or ideology through which all opposition can amalgamate with a common goal of ending the Islamic regime in its totality, and forming the basis for a secular democracy.
The pitfall to be avoided though, is that certain European faction “reformist” mullahs like Khatami and Rafsanjani may succeed to take advantage of the peoples' revolt to their own advantage and attempt to “steal the ball” from the people. If the ‘reformists’ succeed in that effort, it will mean a renewal of life for the Islamic regime for the foreseeable future. This is contrary to what the people of Iran want: a secular democracy.
Same caveat must be applied to any military strikes. We must be very careful where and how we apply military pressure for optimum results. Military strikes could be a two-edged sword when it comes to the eventuality of the total elimination of the regime in Iran.
For instance, if ALL the power centers and interests of the entirety of the regime (i.e., both hardliners as well as the reformists) are hit militarily, or their leaders (both hardliner and reformist) are eliminated (physically if possible) covertly or by military means, this will be quiet effective since any such comprehensive shock to the regime as a whole will most likely provide the final the spark needed for a people to finally rise up and eradicate the Islamic regime as a whole. For after all, a snake without a head is easier to conquer.
If, however, ONLY the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) or the Ghods Force alone are the targets of military strikes, that will weaken only the hardliners (Khamenei, Ahmadinejad, et al) in the regime and actually boost the chances for the ‘refromists’ (EU-supported Khatami, Rafsanjani, et al.) to position themselves for a pounce on the opportunity to return to power again.
And if the ‘reformist’ Khatamites return to power again this way, it will pave the way for the resuming of activities on the part of US liberals, or a Democrat in the White House, to rekindle the “Grand Bargain” all over again with Khatami and Rafsanjani which will guarantee a brand new lease on life for the Islamic regime, but deny the people of Iran their chance to establish their desired secular democracy.
In fact, the people of Iran have not forgotten their close but short contemporary experience in the late 40s to early 50s, with democracy: the democratic, secular movement led by Dr. Mossadegh, the nationalistic popular leader. And even before that, the first Constitution in the entire Middle East was written around a 100-years ago by Constitutional revolutionaries in Iran who wanted to limit the powers of the Shah (King) through the establishment of the first parliamentary system of its kind in the greater region.
Yes, a religious dictatorship was imposed on Iran in 1979, but the Iranian people have not lost their identity, or their inherent creativity and intelligence. Nor have they lost their sense of history as descendants to a great civilization. In fact, the rulers of Iran today are considered by common people as "non-Persians", or they are referred to as the “2nd Arab Invasion” by regular Iranians. The people in Iran may sometimes seem too patient under dictatorship, persecution, and pressure until the pressure gets to the point of explosion. And when that occurs, they will use any opening, however small, to rise and stage a regime change. And you will not have a rebellion without conviction, or result once it does happen.
The reason for the sporadic nature of the protests so far is that the opposition has not united and gathered enough momentum to induce a solid and sure stage for the workers, women, ethnic minorities, students, etc. to all come out en masse in the streets with the intent to overthrow the Theocracy. However, there are now signs that the perfect storm may be starting to form.
Economic sanctions will help in creating more momentum for such a popular uprising, but they are not enough. There needs to be a united front, a unifying figure, or ideology through which all opposition can amalgamate with a common goal of ending the Islamic regime in its totality, and forming the basis for a secular democracy.
The pitfall to be avoided though, is that certain European faction “reformist” mullahs like Khatami and Rafsanjani may succeed to take advantage of the peoples' revolt to their own advantage and attempt to “steal the ball” from the people. If the ‘reformists’ succeed in that effort, it will mean a renewal of life for the Islamic regime for the foreseeable future. This is contrary to what the people of Iran want: a secular democracy.
Same caveat must be applied to any military strikes. We must be very careful where and how we apply military pressure for optimum results. Military strikes could be a two-edged sword when it comes to the eventuality of the total elimination of the regime in Iran.
For instance, if ALL the power centers and interests of the entirety of the regime (i.e., both hardliners as well as the reformists) are hit militarily, or their leaders (both hardliner and reformist) are eliminated (physically if possible) covertly or by military means, this will be quiet effective since any such comprehensive shock to the regime as a whole will most likely provide the final the spark needed for a people to finally rise up and eradicate the Islamic regime as a whole. For after all, a snake without a head is easier to conquer.
If, however, ONLY the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) or the Ghods Force alone are the targets of military strikes, that will weaken only the hardliners (Khamenei, Ahmadinejad, et al) in the regime and actually boost the chances for the ‘refromists’ (EU-supported Khatami, Rafsanjani, et al.) to position themselves for a pounce on the opportunity to return to power again.
And if the ‘reformist’ Khatamites return to power again this way, it will pave the way for the resuming of activities on the part of US liberals, or a Democrat in the White House, to rekindle the “Grand Bargain” all over again with Khatami and Rafsanjani which will guarantee a brand new lease on life for the Islamic regime, but deny the people of Iran their chance to establish their desired secular democracy.
posted by Jeanne De Rakhsh at 2:58 PM
2 Comments:
Persians are ethnically distinct from Arabs, and the population in Iran, mostly composed of people under 30 years old, is the most pro-western, educated, and sophisticated bunch in the Middle East.
If this is true, and I don't know enough about Iran to say it is or isn't definitively, just how did these people get so educated? My understanding is that in an Islamic regime, the basis for all education is Muslim ideology. How sophisticated can one become on a daily dose of Koran et al.? I hear this said all the time, I just don't understand how it could have happened under the watchful eyes of the Iranian education authorities.
That is a great question. To which I can answer that the young people in Iran vehemently seek knowledge of the world outside of Iran. Plus, their upbringing at home has been mostly by parents who have experienced a better life under a different system before. The mothers have experienced what it means to be free of the black overalls walking the streets. The fathers have memories of the days of a happier and emotionally and mentally healthier society, and some older family members may even remember the Mossadegh nationalistic democracy, as well.
So the new generation born and raised under the Islamist regime, the children, are not exactly void of Persian identity due to their parents teachings and stories. and of course due to their own thirst to find more information through internet, friends, relatives abroad, etc. about the west.
The inherent danger is, that if another 28 years passes under the Theocracy, in a 2nd. newer generation, the Persian identity itself may be irreversibly damaged since the Islamist dictatorship eradicates anything nationalistically Persian in its path.
Post a Comment
<< Home