Tweet
The White House has just released this statement from Robert Gibbs:
Like the rest of the world, we were impressed by the vigorous debate and enthusiasm that this election generated, particularly among young Iranians. We continue to monitor the entire situation closely, including reports of irregularities.
Flat, tepid and noncommittal. The White House is trying to strike a balance between three pressures: speaking in a Samizdat fashion to the Moussavi supporters who have just seen the election stolen by Ahmedinejad and the regime; not interfering in post-election events out of very justified concern that the appearance of U.S. involvement will act as a delegitimizing force; and preserving the administration’s freedom of action should it have to accept a second Ahmedinejad term.
The International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran says the international community shouldn’t bother with the third concern. From a statement:
The international community should not recognize the results of Iran’s 12 June 2009 presidential election, which gives all signs of having been manipulated by government authorities to produce a massive victory for incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, according to the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran. The Campaign further recommended that the existing results be voided and new elections held in order to establish legitimacy.
The campaign warns of a "Tehran Tiananmen." I have to post before my girlfriend’s miserable computer eats this post, but more later. Can the White House’s understandable caution really withstand a campaign of popular suppression by the Iranian regime? It’s foolish to think that Moussavi’s supporters are looking outside for support. And it’s irresponsible for the U.S. to do anything that would exacerbate civil tensions within Iran, which has a long, bitter memory of American interference. But rhetorical encouragement from the international community in the face of what may become an uglier moment might seed the bed for a productive relationship with the Iran that is evidently trying to be born.
3 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
RSS/XML Feed
how real are the reports we are getting from blogs about Iranian security forces being routed by mobs in northern cities? Is this just wishful thinking or could this election fraud actually destabilize the regime?
Actually, sad though it is, this might be a pretty good outcome overall.
It’s interesting that they’re so bad at manipulating elections. Perhaps an indication that they haven’t done it much in the past. The fact that they did it in such a ham-handed fashion very well might serve to accelerate a process of delegitimization of the clerical supreme leadership that the election of Mousavi might not have.
And let’s face it, whoever is “President”, the west is REALLY negotiating with the supreme council and Khamenei, so to at least some degree it doesn’t really matter.
There isn’t a whole lot of room for a reformist President to maneuver anyway, so it’s at least POSSIBLE that Mousavi will be more influential as a democratic candidate wrongly defeated…
mikey
The ‘theft’ of the Iranian election. The big news of the moment. The Western media immediately jumped on board, calling the election a “fraud,” “theft,” and “a crime scene”. There was more objective evidence that George W. Bush stole his two elections than there is at this time of election theft in Iran.