In my previous post, I wondered whether the Obama administration would need to make a stronger statement about Iranian electoral fraud or consider other measures for dealing with the regime. The strongly anti-Ahmedinejad Hadi Ghaemi, New York-based spokesman for the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, explains why that’s a mistake.
Robert Gibbs’ White House statement may not fully capture the depth of the crime committed against the Iranian people. "But I think it’s wise for the U.S. government to keep its distance," Ghaemi says. The White House can and should "show concern for human life and protesters’ safety and promote tolerance and dialogue." But to get any further involved, even rhetorically, would "instigate the cry that the reformers are somehow driven and directed by the U.S., whether under Bush or under Obama, and there’s no reason to give that unfounded allegation" any chance to spread.
Ghaemi continues to say that the international community should present a united front that gives "no legitimacy" to the election. In particular, he wants U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to express "serious grievances" about how the election was conducted. "Sanctions and military threats, all these things are counterproductive," Ghaemi says. The initiative has to be expressed and promoted by the Iranians themselves, particularly from Mir Hossein Moussavi and other exponents of popular Iranian outrage. "It very much depends on what leading reformers, including Moussavi, ask them to do, and how much responsibility do they take for exposing them to danger. If they put their tails between their legs and walk away, it will be very sad."
After years of being told in this country that no initiative for the expansion of global human rights will occur absent active U.S. support, Ghaemi’s advice can come across as passivity or indifference. But that reflects a certain arrogance, and occurs at the expense of the goal in question. "We should not have the U.S. lead," says Ghaemi. Instead, the Iranian people have to lead, and the international community, with the U.S. in a background and muted role, ought to refuse acceptance of the regime’s contentions, and not offer positive endorsements of the dissidents and the protesters.
Update: Andrew passes along a Farsi report saying the head of the election-monitoring commission has ruled that the results should be declared invalid and a new election be held. An English translation is available from the National Iranian American Council’s new blog collecting and translating Farsi-language tweets, which I am obsessively refreshing. And don’t miss the excellent, excellent work that Laura Rozen is doing on Iran, a subject she knows extremely well.
Login Here




19 Comments
Spotlight


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
Advanced search
RSS/XML Feed
Agreed. The US is a lightning rod in search of clouds. It will be that way for some time.
Gee, I remember when Ahmedinejad was gracious enough to offer to send people to supervise our elections. There must be something we can do in that same spirit.
Thanks Spencer.
Highly recommend the previous post as well on the election.
Thanks, Spencer. Dangerous situation and the young people are outraged. Read at Huff Post that Moussavi
is apparently under house arrest.
From Laura”
I find that rather interesting. The Supreme Leader is risking a ton here. A guy like Mohtashemipour has a ton of credibility.
Watching the Iranian people and thinking…
Yes, They Can.
Andrew Sullivan is collecting very interesting reports at his Daily Dish Blog.
I agree that the best thing for the U.S. to do is to advocate for honest elections in a fair and even handed way, at this point, until more is known.
But things look very fishy.
This bit is from Juan Cole’s blog, and I think is pretty close to a smoking gun that something is fishy.
6. The Electoral Commission is supposed to wait three days before certifying the results of the election, at which point they are to inform Khamenei of the results, and he signs off on the process. The three-day delay is intended to allow charges of irregularities to be adjudicated. In this case, Khamenei immediately approved the alleged results.
http://www.juancole.com/
The statistical analyses floating around the internet supposedly showing that the vote count was a fraud mean nothing at this point, either for or against. Two few data points, and Nate Silver had a rare whiff in his analysis, his debunking was wrong too. But it will be interesting to look for funny stuff in the vote counts when more data becomes available.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com…..prove.html
I hope for the best. I hope that this is a step towards ending the Iranian peoples’ long nightmare that has been unfolding for over fifty.
Any explanation as to why the election wasn’t fixed at a level that was
at least within the realm of reason?
Incompetent cheaters. Or, they just don’t care anymore.
Well, anytime the rulers of government violate their own election laws to settle a vote in their facor, I would think that a reasonable person would conclude something is wrong. That is the stongest evidence in my mind right now.
I’ve also read reports someplace on the internet that the vote was being counted honestly at the beginning, and the Iranian election commission sent out several reports that Moussavi was ahead. I think Moussavi received addtional reports saying that he would win. That is consistent with the Iranian election commission calling BS as reported in the post. And explains why Moussavi was so quick to call BS. Might also explain why people ready to go to the streets so quickly.
I can imagine what would have happened here if all of a sudden the Pacific Coast and Colorado went McCain, and a close vote in Ohio suddenly reversed course in 2008. I wonder if something like that happened in Iran.
Tehran Street Photos
dailykos.com/story/2009/6/13/742141/
-Tehran-Street-Photos”
Digby has an explanation for this, and I recommend her post. She says it’s the nature of authoritarian regimes to basically say “Yeah I stole the election– what are you gonna do about it?”.
dated June 9. from roozonline
http://www.roozonline.com/engl…..votes.html
I suspect that the Obama administration is all too aware that the imprimatur of the US has been the kiss of death for Iranian moderates in the past — particularly during the Bush regime.
Lordy! Now I read at TPM that the message to Moussavi saying he had won was a ruse, and massive preemptive government repression started even before election started. Rsfanjani resigns both his positions.
So, looks like this was an election so fraudulant, it stinks to high heaven, and a crisis for Iran. Need to find ways to support forces of democracy and liberalization there (on an unofficial citizen level). I guess, look around for petitions to sign.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c…..?ref=fpblg
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c…..?ref=fpblg
Very good idea that Ban Ki-moon should make a statement.
It is very frustrating that Barack Obama can have Morgan Tsvangirai in his office and make a statement, but he can say nothing publicly about this for reasons that are none of his doing. These reasons may even predate George W. Bush.
(4-1 Sox. Baldelli has HR)
(Beckett implodes)