Video: Debating the Election, Protest, and the Tehran Trials (Marandi, Mossavat, and Tisdall)

On Tuesday, Al Jazeera English's Inside Story considered the post-election crisis in Iran, beginning with the trials of almost 100 detainees, with Dr Seyed Mohammad Marandi of the University of Tehran and journalists Shahab Mossavat and Simon Tisdall. Because of restrictions of the media in Iran and the unwillingness of many commentators to appear on Press TV English, it is one of the few in recent weeks that I have seen between an Iran-based specialist and analysts in the "West":

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fD_r-QFNYlU[/youtube]

Comments

[ChrisE]

Western govt's have "acknowledged" that they "have an interest in destabalising Iran"....must have missed that one, Dr Marandi. I think Simon Tisdall makes the excellent point that the current unrest has been a major setback to Obama's engagement strategy.

Did you notice that at 22:31 Marandi initially said that Khameini has been "very courageous" in coming down hard on "any" who have committed abuses...but immediately corrected himself to 'those' who have committed (i.e only the three guards).

Also not sure that the many arrested journalists, as well as editors of those newspapers shut down, would agree on how "positive" the continuing "public debate" by politicians and "newspapers opposed to the government" is.

[Amin]

Mirandi refers to the Zakaria interview where he is asked if he fears becoming know as a mouthpiece for the regime and then laughs it off. Interestingly, he is the only person foreign media are allowed access to and he reminds me a lot of the Iraqi information minister who keep saying Iraq wasn't being invaded in 2003.

I think the moment where Mossavat calls Mirandi a monster is the most compelling. At that point he couldn't stomach Mirandi's outright lies and denial. Almost all iranians, myself included feel that same response when one of these regime aplogists so easily dismiss the murder of their own people. Mirandi, like Ahmadinejad and Khamenaei, is as much an Iranian as George Bush or Saddam Hussein.

Its also funny how when asked about deaths, torture and rapes, his response is America bombed weddings. Does that mean its okay to torture, rape and kill your own people?

[Joobin Zarvan]

Let me be clear, I'm not that innocently naive as to rule out the vested interest of certain countries in exploiting the Iranian situation for their own peculiar gains, as these countries have a well-earnt reputation for that. At the same time, I'm not that silly or simple to reject the existance of negative forces shaping up or packing speed within Iran that tend to wreak havoc with its stability, security and unity. I also believe that there's little wrong with Iran that cannot be fixed with what's right in it. Which is why, I trust in the forces of nature and that there will ultimately come a balance out of this mayhem, but only by the Iranian people themselves.

But I know two of the gentlemen comprising the so-called panel well.
Mr. Marandi and Mr. Mossavat. The first of whom, I know thru debate
shows such as this. The other, thru co-working on debate shows such
as this. But that's nothing important; at least not for the general viewer.
What could be though, is that neither of the two gentlemen, in my opinion,
lived up to expectations of shedding light on the situation in Iran. The third
guest - Mr. Tisdal - well, it wouldn't have mattered much even if he'd been completely absent, as the whole thing revolved around the two Iranian
panelists, understandably so.

Mr. Marandi, got into his usual harangue of evading and avoiding the question, ending up in painful platitudes that do little justice to his position whatever it is. As with Mr. Mossavat, there was nothing usual about his comments, other than him taking things too personally, when it's hardly the time for it. Again something that did little justice to his position, no matter how justified. Nevertheless, I must commend him for being clear, something Mr. Marandi lacked.

The two exchanged some much-heard-of remarks, when at least some people were waiting to hear something new. A new strand or streak of information that could help make sense of it all; This disgusting denigration and disturbing denial of rights and reason. But then, that was too much to expect I suppose; from the contributing guests, Aljazeera and perhaps everyone these days. Is it...!?

I don't blame any of the guests for the rather obfuscating content of this rather spirited show, but only the presenter for failing to encourage and steer a more informed debate and the producer for missing the whole point. That the world already knows of the widening crack in the wall separating Iranians from one another and how opposing camps feel about it. What many people in the world do not know and yet deserve to, is what is this wall actually made of – the context - how are the people divided, what is sustaining it, where are the fault lines, what is really at stake from an Iranian’s perspective, the far-reaching repercussions of this crisis, how and why did Iran get here in the first place, possible ways out and the country’s future regardless of the contestations, consternation and convulsions.

The psycho-social fabric of the unrest movement in Iran and the horrendous interplay of internal and external forces that keep driving it, deserve a more subtle and nuanced treatment in a debate.

In the meantime, I'll be hoping higher for better days and ways for Iran and Iranians.