Drama continues in Tehran; outcome uncertain
The dramatic events in Tehran continue to play out. Seven are dead in continuing protests, and the ruling clerics have been forced to concede to a limited recount of selected ballot boxes. That probably won’t amount to anything, but the fact that the government has been forced to make such a gesture after announcing a convincing victory by Ahmadinijad indicates its confidence has been shaken.
Here at home, debate continues over the proper course of American response. President Obama has chosen not to interject himself or this country into the Iranian drama, fearing that by publicly choosing sides he would expose the reformers to charges of being American stooges, a crippling label in a country that very much wants to set its own course.
That hasn’t set well with the “do something, anything” crowd. Bret Stephens, writing in The Wall Street Journal, accuses Obama of “acquiescing in the overthrow — before it can even be installed — of another democratically elected Iranian government,” going on to liken the president’s inaction to that of Dwight Eisenhower in the 1956 Hungarian Revolution, which was brutally suppressed by the Soviet Union while the United States stood by:
“…then as now the administration effectively turned its back on the uprising when U.S. support could have made a difference. Hungary would spend the next 33 years in the Soviet embrace. One senses a similar fate for Iran, where Mr. Ahmadinejad’s “victory” signals the ultimate ascendancy of the ultra-militants in the Revolutionary Guards Corps and the paramilitary Basij, intent on getting what they want and doing as they please even in defiance of their old clerical masters.”
Stephens’ analysis would carry more impact if he had suggested an actual course of action that Obama might take and then outlined what effect such action was supposed to produce. He does neither, raising doubt about just how deeply he has thought this through.
Eisenhower, for example, could have intervened militarily on behalf of the Hungarians but did not, understanding that to do so probably would have touched off World War III. And anything short of that intervention, up to and including attempted UN resolutions, would have been and in fact was futile. Even in hindsight, it is difficult to criticize the wisdom of Eisenhower’s decision.
In Hungary, the case for intervention was made stronger by the fact that repression was imposed by outsiders in the form of the Soviet army. The struggle in Iran, by contrast, is strictly internal, pitting Iranian against Iranian. David Ignasius, writing in the Washington Post, argues that the short-term struggle must be won or lost at that level. He also attributes the uprising in part to Obama’s outreach to Iran, suggesting that the demonstrators are responding to the lure of better relations with the United States and the outside world :
“Obama would make a mistake if he seemed to meddle in Iranian politics. That would give the mullahs the foreign enemy they need to discredit the reformers. Obama struck the right tone when he said late Monday: “The world is watching and inspired by their participation, regardless of what the ultimate outcome of the election was.” The basic message is: We support the Iranian people and their democracy. Any change in how Iran is governed is their decision, not America’s….
Reason vs. unreason; outreach vs. closed minds; connection with the modern world vs. isolation and backwardness; freedom vs. repression. This is the shape of the debate in Iran and much of the rest of the Muslim world as the age of Obama moves forward. For once, it’s an argument that puts America firmly (but unobtrusively) on the side of the people. What we’re seeing in Tehran is a reminder that millions of Muslims hunger for change — but they want to make it themselves.”
For the most part, the revolution is not being televised. Government suppression of mainstream media has made coverage difficult, particularly by the electronic press. Instead, this popular uprising is covering itself, through Twitter, Facebook and other social media. The image above is taken from postings at Picfog, collating images posted through Twitter. Texts posted to Twitter can be followed here. In some of the posts, for example, protesters are asking for public help in identifying the thugs whose violent behavior is documented in the images, just as government agents are no doubt using the images to identify protesters.
Those Americans wishing to express personal support for what’s happening can do so using the same media.
As Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic notes, such dispatches are unfiltered and of uncertain origins, and should be judged accordingly. He calls it an “intelligence service to the masses,” allowing civilians thousands of miles away to follow events in real time, conveyed by real people. However this particular uprising plays out, the challenge to repression posed by social media has never been more clear, or more inspiring.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
157 comments Add your comment
TnGelding
June 16th, 2009
9:18 am
Good posting, Jay. You’re right about the comparison to Hungary, of course. It appears that the protesters that have been killed became a little too threatening. The government has shown restraint up to this point.
I Report :-) You Whine :-(
June 16th, 2009
9:20 am
That probably won’t amount to anything, but the fact that the government has been forced to make such a gesture after announcing a convincing victory by Ahmadinijad indicates its confidence has been shaken.
Yeah, sort of like invoking PayGo rules.
He also attributes the uprising in part to Obama’s outreach to Iran
What a total load of BS.
These same people have been “protesting” since even before Bush was president, anybody who denies that is a fool. Protesting for their freedom from tyranny.
TnGelding
June 16th, 2009
9:22 am
And a long overdue posting. Obama is playing it just right. There’s nothing he can really do anyway. It’s an internal matter for them to decide, and so far it looks like they’re going to resolve it without any massive retaliation.
TnGelding
June 16th, 2009
9:23 am
I Report
You Whine 
June 16th, 2009
9:20 am
Protesting, yes. At this scale, no.
Bosch
June 16th, 2009
9:23 am
President Obama has chosen not to interject himself or this country into the Iranian drama, fearing that by publicly choosing sides he would expose the reformers to charges of being American stooges, a crippling label in a country that very much wants to set its own course
I agree.
Ahmanenajeadamundodude would love to see Obama support the opposition, it would give him just the fuel he needs to paint us as an imperialistic nation trying to intervene in Middle Eastern (Islamic) affairs and would swirl up another round of jihadists.
clyde
June 16th, 2009
9:24 am
The do nothing approach for the U.S. seems proper to me.The current President is going to still be there when the dust finally settles,barring anything short of all out civil war.
The current Irani President is in Russia attending a summit meeting at the moment.
A lot of green showing up.Hamas colors,maybe?Time will tell.
I Report :-) You Whine :-(
June 16th, 2009
9:24 am
Student activist Vahid Abedini said that several hundred students protested outside as Ahmadinejad was delivering the speech to selected guests in a hall inside the university.
Students had listed 20 questions they wanted to ask Ahmadinejad on human-rights issues — including the expulsion of students from classes because of their political activities — and Iran’s foreign policy, including Ahmadinejad’s statements questioning the extent of the Holocaust.-2007
duh
Mousavvi is the one who is responsible for what we are seeing, Obozo is a spineless stooge, captivated by his own cowardice.
Pure and simple.
TnGelding
June 16th, 2009
9:25 am
What inflation?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090616/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/economy
Normal
June 16th, 2009
9:26 am
President Obama is doing the the correct course of action, period. He has to keep the door open for future talks with the declared winner.
If this becomes a true movement of the people or another Tiananmen Square remains to be seen, but it must be that the Irani decide.President Obama is practicing the old adage “Keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than open it and remove all doubt”.
AH
June 16th, 2009
9:26 am
Little Barry makes comments on everything from what temperature you can have your AC set to to what kind of car you can drive. He was all gun-ho to make comments when he though Ahmadinijad was going to lose, now that he was wrong he suddenly is right to be silent?
Way to justify his failure Jay, just keep towing the line.
pat
June 16th, 2009
9:26 am
As the palistinians chose hamas, so the iranians chose Imanutjob for president. Two examples of when you give these societies a chance to choose, they will chosse the radical, militant islam, not the moderate, peace, love and flowers islam. The popultaions of these places, in their majority, prefer radical islamic rule. That is what they voted for.
In Pakisatan, the moderate governement over-thrown and a more radical (though not as nuts as iran) islamic governemt put in place.
If I am a bettin’ man, and I am, my money is on the fact that the middle east is full of radical islam, not moderate reformist islam. As the attacks continue, so much they don’t even make it to the news anymore, the myth of a islamic moderation is dying.
The wells have been poisioned and the people are in support of radialism.
Shouldn’t our attention be focused on how to quell the threats that are imposed rather than worry about who they chose. No matter who is in power there will be two constants, they will hate Israel and the USA. We can’t fix that.
Tyler Durden
June 16th, 2009
9:28 am
Ahh, the Hater in Chief has already posted (AKA His Whininess). Imagine how happy your life would be if you just gave in to loving your fellow man and stop being such a tool of the G-No-P and their sad, dated agenda. Just imagine happiness!
Regarding Jay’s blog: yeah, it’s a touchy situation for sure. but like Iran, America was also under a tyrannous regime bent on holding power, and we came out OK last Fall. So there’s hope…
I Report :-) You Whine :-(
June 16th, 2009
9:28 am
TN- You know, if I wanted a response from you libs akin to what my neighbor’s yapping dog would give, I would go ask my neighbor’s dog for one. Why do YOU feel the need?
Defeated Iranian reformist Mir-Hossein Mousavi calls for more protest against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Obozo remains silenced by his cowardice.
Normal
June 16th, 2009
9:28 am
“Keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than open it and remove all doubt”.
———————
Paying attention, Whiner…just askin’
TnGelding
June 16th, 2009
9:29 am
I Report
You Whine 
June 16th, 2009
9:24 am
Obo might be a coward, but to this point he has certainly done nothing to indicate that. To the contrary, he has stood up to the bullying GOP and faced them down. If Gore and Kerry had done the same this country wouldn’t be in the unenviable position it’s in. You demean yourself by throwing the label around so casually.
Doggone/GA
June 16th, 2009
9:29 am
“As the palistinians chose hamas, so the iranians chose Imanutjob for president”
From the level of the protest, and the numbers of protestors…methinks you are totally misinterpreting the situation. THEY seem to think they did NOT choose Ahmadinejad. And they should know better than you do, don’t you think?
Kamchak
June 16th, 2009
9:30 am
Bosch
Reply about Ribery downstairs.
I Report :-) You Whine :-(
June 16th, 2009
9:32 am
Geez, Obozo knows that if there are any elections that should be reviewed for fraud, it would be the US presidential of 2008, hahahahaha.
Like this tinpot is going to throw stones from his glasshouse.
morons.
TnGelding
June 16th, 2009
9:34 am
I Report
You Whine 
June 16th, 2009
9:28 am
It’s just my nature. Sorry if I’ve offended you by showing you some attention. I suspect most don’t even bother to read your repetitive diatribes:
2: a bitter and abusive speech or writing
Mrs. Godzilla
June 16th, 2009
9:34 am
President Obama is doing the right thing.
As Will said….Discretion is he better part of valor.
Lord Help Us
June 16th, 2009
9:35 am
The irony is KILLING me!!
The wingnut fringe who DESPERATELY want a Christian theocracy in the US, are all about promoting secular rule in non-Christian countries.
A Muslim theocracy in a Muslim country is OUTRAGEOUS, but a Christian theocracy in a Christian country is just dandy…
Can anyone explain why? Are they jealous that Iran already has a gov’t like they want in this country??
What a stooge parade…
Jay
June 16th, 2009
9:36 am
Hi all. Just back from vacation, trying to catch up. Hope you didn’t miss me much.
DB, Gwinnettian
June 16th, 2009
9:37 am
I’m really trying to read that WSJ neocon swill Jay’s linked to, but… the stupid, it burns!
DB, Gwinnettian
June 16th, 2009
9:38 am
Jay, now that you’re back, I hope you’ve horsewhipped whoever it was that allowed the Obama-bowing-to-Hitler ‘toon.
TnGelding
June 16th, 2009
9:39 am
Jay
June 16th, 2009
9:36 am
Welcome back. We need you to help whip Distorter back in line.
Gandalf, the White! (!)
June 16th, 2009
9:40 am
TnGelding you are such a PU$$Y!
Normal
June 16th, 2009
9:41 am
Jay, coming in a little late, aren’t you?
Gandalf, the White! (!)
June 16th, 2009
9:41 am
valor is the better part of valor, we should end the regime in Iran.
mm
June 16th, 2009
9:42 am
Does anyone EVER know what the hell Whiner is talking about? EVER? Pure gibberish.
It’s in the GOP playbook to butt in and tell other countries how their countries should be run. That’s why the world hated Bush.
Obama is correct to stay out of the Iran election.
Gandalf, the White! (!)
June 16th, 2009
9:42 am
Normal, he is the middle of a job hunt, cut him some slack!
Normal
June 16th, 2009
9:43 am
Gandalf! Hug, hug…Please read my 9:28 to Whiner…
DB, Gwinnettian
June 16th, 2009
9:44 am
we should end the regime in Iran.
What’s this “we” stuff, white man?
Gandalf, the White! (!)
June 16th, 2009
9:44 am
the world loves Barry, cuz he bows to them and let’s them do whatever they want, like ignore UN sanctions. Bush said “pay the piper son”, and meant it! Barry is weak and makes us weaker every day.
Nothing for a whiner to worry about
June 16th, 2009
9:46 am
Iran has their elections and we have ours. Yet, a right wing bozo moron nut case coward here on this blog thinks that Obama should say or do something regarding another country’s politics. Just what would you have Obama do to make your day, Faux Reporter / True Whiner.
Gandalf, the White! (!)
June 16th, 2009
9:46 am
Normal! Good advice, take it!
mm
June 16th, 2009
9:46 am
Hey warmongers. Remember, you are not in control anymore.
Doggone/GA
June 16th, 2009
9:46 am
“Bush said “pay the piper son”, ”
He sure did. And now we ARE paying…big time.
Doggone/GA
June 16th, 2009
9:47 am
“Just what would you have Obama do to make your day”
Complainers don’t have answers. Just complaints. It’s the “someone should do something” lament. They don’t know who, and they don’t know what…but SOMEONE should do SOMETHING.
Peter
June 16th, 2009
9:48 am
The Washington Post article is by David Ignatius, not David Iglesias. Iglesias was the former U.S. Attorney who Bush II dismissed in 2006.
Gandalf, the White! (!)
June 16th, 2009
9:49 am
Doggone/GA we are paying, but not as much as Barry is making us pay! He is spending more than EVERY PRESIDENT BEFORE HIM COMBINED! So learn a bit, then come back and address me.
I Report :-) You Whine :-(
June 16th, 2009
9:49 am
Iran has their elections and we have ours. Yet, a right wing bozo moron nut case coward here on this blog thinks that Obama should say or do something regarding another country’s politics. Just what would you have Obama do to make your day, Faux Reporter / True Whiner.
Read the article up at the top of the page, moron, before you whine at me.
Obozo is TAKING CREDIT FOR IT, you helpless retard.
Jay
June 16th, 2009
9:49 am
gandolph, if you want to act like that, do it somewhere else.
And Peter, thanks for the note, You’re right of course, and I will correct ASAP.
Redneck Convert
June 16th, 2009
9:50 am
Well, I reckon this Obama’s next move will be to go over there and bow and scrape and kiss this Amanutjob’s rear end. I’m sick of waiting for the war to start. We need to lob a couple big ones at Iran and then move in while we got troops over there. Instead of waiting till they get a couple big ones to lob at us. If My President was still in office we would already be at war with Iran. But no, we got this big sissy in the White House that wants to apologize to everybody and act like we done something wrong.
Somebody needs to tell Bookman that we done just fine without him. The last blog had 5 pages of responses and he didn’t hardly write anything to get it started. Maybe if he goes on vacation for good the AJC will stop bleeding money and people will start reading it again.
Have a good day everybody.
Gandalf, the White! (!)
June 16th, 2009
9:50 am
DB, Gwinnettian I meant we people of integrity, not sissy’s like you, color man!
AmVet
June 16th, 2009
9:51 am
“I suspect most don’t even bother to read your repetitive diatribes:”
That is SHONUFF true!
“Does anyone EVER know what the hell Whiner is talking about? EVER? Pure gibberish.”
A TOTAL waste of time…
“What a stooge parade…”
Love that! And sadly apropos.
“As the palistinians chose hamas, so the iranians chose Imanutjob for president”
pat, which explains why the majority of Iraqis don’t want American troops there. Most never did.
Until more than a tiny few of of them demonstrates that they will mutually pledge to each other their lives, their fortunes & their sacred honor, the blood lusting and idiotic neo-cons and chickenhawks are just p!$$ing in the wind.
Perhaps, the Iranian people will put everything they’ve got on the line to throw off the tyrants.
Why am I so skeptical?
RW-(the original)
June 16th, 2009
9:53 am
Hi all. Just back from vacation, trying to catch up. Hope you didn’t miss me much.
No and yes. No in the respect that we get the same article every day with the words rearranged so it’s pretty much like when you’re here. Yes in the respect that every comment thread is five pages of gay marriage proponents ranting.
It is a little funny that when years from now people googling to see what that Alf lookalike told Columbia University about there being no gays in Iran that this blog will dominate the search results yet provide no answer.
Doggone/GA
June 16th, 2009
9:53 am
“So learn a bit, then come back and address me.”
Actually, I’ve learned a lot. I’ve learned it’s not a good thing to start a war, then CUT taxes. I’ve learned it’s not a good thing to attack a country that was NO THREAT to you and then to say it will only take 6 months to win. How long has it been now, 6 years and counting? I’ve learned it’s not a good thing to announce “mission accomplished” when it ISN’T. I’ve learned that the party of “fiscal conservatism” is a borrow-and-spend party. And that they spend like drunken sailors.
And I’ve learned that when the world economy is teetering on the edge of a VERY high cliff that ONLY governments have enough money to build the bridges needed to keep the economy from falling off that cliff.
mm
June 16th, 2009
9:53 am
Whiner,
Maybe you should hire a designated poster so that we can understand the points you are trying to make. Because you strike out every time.
Paul
June 16th, 2009
9:56 am
Welcome back, Jay. I trust you had an enjoyable break. Just returned from San Diego and thought the last lonnnnnng thread was just because you were enjoying it so!
The WSJ piece – so some commentators don’t have a history background – what’s new? Intervene in Hungary? The Soviets would’ve rolled over us. Just back up a couple of years – Berlin airlift. It was an airlift ’cause we didn’t have the ability to impose a ground corridor. But the alignment of forces (military, social, economic, political) weren’t right back then for a challenge to authority, as it was in the 90s. Maybe the same’s true now in Iran, altho I think the mullahs aren’t quite ready to concede.
Hmmm. Wasn’t it just a few months ago the Bush Administration was encouraging (through secret programs) anti-regime resistance groups? Wasn’t this reported – revealed – by some mainstream publications, which led to the resistance crumbling? I wonder if these same outlets will continue the ‘reveal secret resistance programs’ under this administration?
Probably.
I agree with part of what pat wrote – the people chose their leader and what he represents. Americans may be bewildered by it (well, some Americans), as it is eminently self evident ‘we’ had the great good sense, when presented a choice, to select the new, open minded, new approach, proponent of kind, progressive, fair policies with a determination to have everyone know their destiny is our destiny and we all need to work together for truth, justice, and the …. well, ‘good’ way.
And the Iranians picked the wrong guy. Election’s gotta be fixed.
So I’m betting our relations with them will be more strained – what’s the incentive, what’s the national interest, for Ahmadinejad to dial it back?
As far as the new media: welcome to the new world, mullahs. And welcome to increased censorship, crackdowns, torture and death, Iranian dissidents.
Doggone/GA
June 16th, 2009
9:56 am
“that we can understand the points you are trying to make.”
I don’t think he’s trying to make points, I think he’s accumulating them. Every post = 1 point. 500 points gets a free cup of coffee. I don’t know who “pays up” but SOMEONE must be doing it.