Tuesday
Jan052010
Iran: How Outside "Help" Can Hurt the Green Movement
Tuesday, January 5, 2010 at 6:28 
Josh Shahryar writes for EA:Today 36 members of Iran's Parliament tabled a bill ensuring that anyone designated by the courts as a "combatant" be executed within five days. The bill seeks to amend an existing law that states that anyone who "tampers" with public opinion, a clause used mainly these days to indicate calling for protests or joining them, can be designated as a combatant. Iranian protesters are being accused of treason and for attempting to stage a "velvet revolution" even when all they are demanding is the rights granted to them by the Constitution.
While observers inside and outside Iran may be baffled by the claims of such a revolution, the Iranian government has some cause. There may be no facts for a foreign-instigated regime change; however, some outsiide the country --- both "foregin" and Iranian --- may give the regime the pretext to prosecute peaceful protesters.
A current case surrounds Amir Abbas Fakhravar, a US-based Iranian student activist – who has lately been making the rounds in the Western media as one of the supposed insiders of the Green movement. I do not wish to doubt his story of how he was arrested multiple times in Iran, nor do I wish to question his credentials as a bona fide activist fighting for human rights in Iran or his status as a student leader. My concern is that the statements he is making may hurt the Green movement’s cause in Iran, spreading disinformation and ignoring key facts.
Consider his statement in 2007 to the website WorldNetDaily:
Noting 72 percent of Iranians are under 30 years of age, Fakhravar contends many young people are prepared to join the opposition. “We have the ability inside,” he said. “This is the silent army inside Iran, and we need the media to encourage them. American policy should trust us. We could do it.”
His most recent article, published in the New York Daily News, is more of the same:
Months before the 2009 presidential elections, they decided to use the mullahs’ own tactics against them – and to seize and own all of the icons of the Islamic Republic and give them a new identity….So when there was massive fraud in Ahmadinejad’s reelection, the people were ready.
The planning of all those years planted the seeds; the brutality provided the spark. The Green Movement finally gained a complete identity with powerful symbols – even with its own martyrs.
If you haven’t followed the news from Iran, these statements don’t really stand out as dangerous. But they are fuel for the inferno that the Iranian regime is stoking for the Green Movement.
Consider the 2007 assertion of "silent army" from 2007. There is little evidence to suggest that three years ago, Iranians were readying to take to the streets. On the other hand, such an assertion allows the Islamic regime to detain people for supposedly planning protests for two years. An unsupported claim can be conclusive evidence for this regime.
The second statement is even more damning. So month before the election, people were ready to take to streets. For what exactly? The protests did not start as a backlash against the oppression of the regime, but because of perceived fraud in the election. How could one know in December 2008 that the results would be manipulated and thus plan for millions to march to overthrow a regime?
In the New York Daily News article, Fakhravar gives further credence to the government’s claims of a "velvet revolution" against the regime.
What we are witnessing on the streets of Tehran and other cities is nothing short of a revolution –-- a carefully orchestrated, years-in-the-making attempt to overthrow a corrupt and repressive regime and replace it with something fundamentally more free, democratic and secular.
So, yes, there is a "velvet revolution", according to Fakhravar. As Mir Hossein Mousavi continues to hold out that this is not an overthrow of the Islamic Republic, Fakhravar claims exactly that. (The course of events may transform this movement into a revolution, but at the moment, it is a demand for reform. Wishful thinking is not going to alter that.) How can we blame the Revolutionary Guard for claiming that Iran faces "regime change" in the face of this publicity?
And so the supposed "velvet revolution" takes over the public stage. The Washington Times writes:
Amir Abbas Fakhravar, 35, a former student leader who spent several years in prison in Iran and now lives in the Washington area, said contacts are taking place on Facebook and Skype and that activists plan to create a “revolutionary council” of about 15 people inside and outside Iran to lead the “Iranian Green Revolution.”
And here’s an interview from FrontPage Magazine:
FP: So where does the leadership come from?
Fakhravar: This movement doesn’t have a leader, but things like Facebook help. We use social media to help organize events inside Iran. For instance, we are planning a demonstration in February to coincide with the 31st anniversary of the Iranian revolution. Earlier this year, I was giving a speech before Congress and I said, “Iranians don’t want a war. All we need are cell phones, cameras and computers.” Some of the Senators laughed at that. But it has happened. We are close to a cyber revolution in Iran.
The first important point is, whether the West likes it or not, Mir Hossein Mousavi and to a large extent Mehdi Karroubi are the leaders of the Green Movement. Yes, I agree completely that these men have a dirty past. I also agree that under them, it would be almost impossible to ask for a completely secular society, but too bad. That’s just what it is.
Fakhravar’s opinion does not change the fact that when Mousavi or Karroubi join the protests, they are welcomed like leaders. Neither does it change the fact that people openly chant Karroubi and Mousavi’s names during protests even when they are not present. And it does not explain green graffiti exalting Mousavi and Karroubi on Tehran’s walls.
As for a revolution by Facebook, most social networking websites are banned in Iran. Their usage inside Iran is extremely limited and only possible through the use of anti-internet filtering software. It is not realistic to expect hundreds of thousands of people to come out on the streets simply because Iranians abroad are posting information for them on websites that they cannot even access. The "Twitter Revolution" may mean that social networking media can be used by people to quickly inform each other of news, but it is not currently a tool to organise demonstrations. That is one reason why protests are planned weeks in advance.
I have no wish or desire to question Mr. Fakhravar’s credentials or his intentions, but his statements about the Green Movement are, at the least, inaccurate, and he does not seem to know or acknowledge important facts about the current situation in Iran.
While the second error can be neglected, the first will be used by the Iranian regime to persecute peaceful protesters by the Iranian regime. If people like Fakhravar really care for human rights and democracy, they would spend some time studying what is going on inside Iran and then make informed and undamaging statements.
Iranians are already facing enough peril. Let’s not make it harder on them.
Reader Comments (41)
Josh
I think iranian people were ready to go in the streets and demonstrate even five or six years ago if they were free, because something were wrong and they were not happy to live in such conditions; every where in the world and in each country, the leaders of the country have to be willing to lend a sympathetic ear and understand their people ; as have to do the parents with their children if not, there will be clashes in home; the fraudulents elections were only an excuse to express this desperate situation, it was the "spark"; I don't see any problem in the statement of Fakhravar; our close- minded leaders have to assume their "ERRORS"; unfortunately , they don't understand the meaning of neither "justice" nor "forgiveness".
@Ange Paris
I agree with you, six years ago in the summer of 2003 I witnessed some small demonstrations in Esfahan and a small town nearby. People were then already speaking about 'change'. So the election of 2009 was the spark that lit the fire again.
"Secular society" is not incompatible with" republic islamic" , we will be in a "republic " regime and "Islamic" because the majority of iranians are muslim, separation of state and religion with only "Velayate faghih" being thrown !
Hi Josh,
I don't understand the point you're trying to make when you quote Fakhravar as saying that Mousavi and Karroubi are the leaders of the Green Movement ("The first important point is, whether the West likes it or not, Mir Hossein Mousavi and to a large extent Mehdi Karroubi are the leaders of the Green Movement.") and then you seem to critique this statement by saying that Fakhravar’s opinion does not change the fact that Mousavi and Karroubi are considered/treated as leaders of the Green Movement by its members. You're actually both saying the same thing. What did you mean here?
Thanks.
Ange and Nelly,
While I do agree with you that Iranians were ready to take to streets at least mentally, the Green Movement was not a planned 'revolution'. People did not plan for years to take to streets on this given June to overthrow the regime. That is what the regime is saying and that is what they are prosecuting people for. Fakharvar is actually feeding their fears by saying that it indeed was planned years ahead.
Here's the quote from the my analysis:
"What we are witnessing on the streets of Tehran and other cities is nothing short of a revolution –– a carefully orchestrated, years-in-the-making attempt to overthrow a corrupt and repressive regime and replace it with something fundamentally more free, democratic and secular."
That's my entire point. The regime is prosecuting people saying that this is an carefully orchestrated, years-in-the-making attempt to overthrow the regime. And the reason why I wrote this is because statement such as these are being and will be used as evidence against protesters in Iran's courts.
Catherine,
No, he actually isn't saying the same thing. He's saying and I quote from the analysis above, "Fakhravar: This movement doesn’t have a leader, but things like Facebook help."
My point in the entire length of the analysis is that he's claiming and to a large extent the Western media is now claiming that the Green Movement does not have a leader which it clearly has.
Oops - I see now that you were differing with the very beginning of the quote. Why on eaeth HE says in the same breath "This movement doesn’t have a leader, but things like Facebook help."and "The first important point is, whether the West likes it or not, Mir Hossein Mousavi and to a large extent Mehdi Karroubi are the leaders of the Green Movement." only he can know! :-)
Josh
This regime needs always a third person to prosecute, it's always the fault of Us or Uk or UE or... now they have iranians to prosecute saying :" they work for Satan "; there is no logic in their behavor and seek a pretext to belittle and overwhelm the opponents; people were ready to take to streets and perhaps mentally, as you say but with this kind of regime there was also, and surely, individual groups, who for long time, have evolved this plan actively like Fakhravar & his fellows, taken even in jail . What I want to say is that, it's not the fault of Fakhravar all these prosecutions, we have faced a regime where the members have suffered from schizophrenia !
I agree with you 100%! Every time somebody outside of Iran are saying crap, whether its Rajavi's, Fakhravar or Monarchists, they are making it more easy for the regime to punish innocent demonstrators.
In the last interview I saw with Marandi on CNN (by Amanpour) he justified the regimes actions by referring to some recent statements by MKO.
The world is not black and white - and thankfully our choices are not limited to the IRI and Fakhravar... or we'd be truly doomed.
I have seen Fakhravar work up close and personal - he is a a deceptive, unscrupulous, and wholly unapologetic opportunist. In fact, all of his contemporary student leaders like Ahmad Batebi, Ali Afshari, Akbar Atri, and even the more 'tond ro' types like Salehi or Zaranchi (sp?) hate (and I mean HATE) the guy.
His record after escaping Iran is just horrible... first off, he was literally picked in the UAE PERSONALLY by Richard Pearle and brought to the US. Its then downhill from there, associating and working for various explicitly neo-con and monarchist organizations.
I personally entangled with him during the protests in DC this summer, where he tried to get all the 'green' protesters to join a protest he was organizing on Jun 21st... when people went, they found a 30 foot monarchist flag with Mr. Reza Pahlavi himself behind the podium talking about the "green" movement. sooooo many people were pissed off.
here is a quote from this duplicitous character for you
(sourced in wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amir-Abbas_Fakhravar):
In an interview with Ynet Fakhravar described that if the West launches a military attack on Iran, "the top brass will flee immediately. People will come out onto the streets protesting, why are we being bombed? Many of the regime’s mid-level officials will shave their beards, don ties and join the (civilians) on the streets."[6]
I want to clarify - I dont mean this guy any ill - damesh garm for working so hard for his beliefs, and I could not imagine what he went through in Iran's prisons. But his 'past performance' does not excuse his present choices. He is dead wrong about most of his analysis - his 'friends' are dead wrong - and most dangerous of all - his views, and statements, like those described by Josh above will result in the actual death of people on the ground in Iran.
Thanks to Josh and to Green Lurker for additional details. I am convinced that Fakhravar will not be the last one, trying to present himself to Western media as an ideal alternative to Moussavi and Karroubi, because this is what he intends to say in reality. Both leaders have declared several times that they follow the movement instead of leading it. Even if this may be some kind of Persian taarof, both are intelligent enough to realize the scope of this movement, ranging from religious traditionalists to secular modernists, and the latter are likely to prefer different leaders. In any case all efforts of expatriates like Fakhravar will be in vain, because no one will accept someone sitting in a nice and quite place, while protesters risks their necks day by day. The outcome of such dishonest statements (no one expected the election results to be distorted) may be fatal, but they are certainly not the main cause for ongoing suppression. As the regime has lost its political and religious legitimacy, violence is the only issue to prevent faster collapse.
For the time after an interim government led by Moussavi and Karroubi, running state affairs would be a feasible solution. During this (explicitly limited) period an all-party commission could work out a new constitution and prepare free elections.
I certainly do not support neither M nor K, but realpolitik is based on compromise, and if a majority accepts this interim solution, it could reduce the politically unstable transition period.
Josh,
For all intents and purposes here, Fakhravar is the Iranian, and we are the "outside help." He has every right to pursue his agenda for his country, whether we think he's conducting himself poorly or not. Sure, a lot of it ranges from pure fantasy to flat-out lying, but he's an activist, not a journalist. More importantly, he's an Iranian citizen, so either outside help hurts and we should allow him to act freely, or outside help doesn't hurt and he should listen to us and act according to our standards. We can't expect both.
As for the regime using Fakhravar's words as reasoning to crack down on protesters, this seems grossly unfair of us to lay at the feet of the activists themselves, "blaming the victim," if you will. As you pointed out, the demonstrators are merely asking for rights already guaranteed to them by the constitution, therefore there is nothing intrinsically dangerous about what they're doing. Rather it is the reaction of the regime and security forces which are to blame, not the actions, and certainly not the rhetoric, of the protesters.
We have absolutely no reason to believe that if Fakhravar, or anyone else, were to behave by our standards that the regime would cease, or relax, its crackdown. Accordingly, we have no reason to blame Fakhravar, or any other activist, for the regime's response.
On the whole, I agree completely with your broader assertion that outside help could hurt the reform movement. However in this case I'd recommend that we remind ourselves who exactly is the Iranian, and who is the Outsider.
--UJ
UJ
Affarin and Bravo !
I hope and dream to go to my free country where all the iranians will be present, from Mariam Rajavi, Reza II, to all the dissent religious mollahs ( sorry I don't know their name but I know there are lots of them in UK or USA) and exiled iranians living for 30 years abroad , all the people whose hearts beat wildly for the homeland.
Marandi is just going to lie, lie, and lie more to protect the regime while it kills innocent Iranians. His justifications are basically meaningless as just like Ahmadinejad he will dig up any insane theory to rationalize the government's murder of its own people.
So to say that ex-pat groups such as Pahlavi or the MKO should be silent lest the regime use them to justify violence is really a moot point and just serves to make idiots like Marandi artificially relevant. The regime and the Iranian people know very well that this is not an "MKO" movement, they know that Yale university isn't plotting a coup, they know that the protesters aren't "zionists". It is all nonsense, so just ignore Marandi except to tell CNN to stop letting him use their channel as a platform to beat people over the head with Ahmadinejad's propaganda.
@ange paris:
I share the same dream as you. But Mariam Rajavi (among many others) must prove her innocence in court if she want to go back or accept the punishment for the crimes she and her group have done. Of course only if the people want to prosecute her and her group.
Heidar
"must prove her innocence in court if she want to go back or accept the punishment for the crimes she and her group have done. "
I don't know who you are - or whether you are a Regime supporter or a "reformist".
But your statement has encapsulated just about everything that is wrong with the Middle East today.
IF - you desire a Democratic system of Government with an independent judiciary, then you need to get your head around these basic ideas.
"must prove her innocence in court if she want to go back"
Firstly, the Judiciary must PROVE a person to be guilty of a crime - people do not have to prove their innocence!!
"or accept the punishment for the crimes she and her group have done." Secondly, a person is innocent until PROVEN GUILTY (by the Courts)
Thirdly, a person does not receive sentence of punishment UNTIL proven guilty
Barry
Ange Paris,
I'm not saying it is all Fakhravar's fault. The point is not that. The point is that statement these can be used and have been used the government to persecute people. I only singled him out because he is going around and saying in pretty every media outlet out there. The more he says this, the more it will add on to the pile of 'evidence' the government has against the protesters.
I didn't question who he is or what his intentions are. I'm just saying misguided patriotism can backfire pretty bad.
UJ,
First point, I don't consider myself outside help. I have no intention of meddling in internal Iranian politics when it comes to what kind of a system they want. However, when it comes to Human Rights - we call them Human Rights for a reason - it is my business as a human being. So no, there, I'm not outside help because there is no inside and outside. Sure, I didn't criticize his background or what he does. Kudos for him for the activism. But again, misguided intentions backfire and that's something we can't deny.
Point 2,
Of course I am going to blame him. Like you said, the people in Iran are asking for their rights guaranteed to them by the constitution. This guy comes out and he's saying that very constitution and the government based upon it all must be thrown. And not just be overthrown, but there's been planning to overthrow it for months before the election - even years. First of all, where is this guy's evidence. Secondly, that doesn't sound too much like the Green Movement's slogans.
Point 3,
He didn't start saying this right now. He's been beating the drum for years. Of course we can't blame him solely. But his statements and statements like his are simply more reason for the government's evidence folder. That he can't deny, you can't deny and I can't deny. Will they persecute people even if he hadn't these words and or ceases say these statements, likely not, but that doesn't mean him saying isn't going to hurt further.
And last point,
I don't think anyone's above criticism. If someone thinks he's making statements that he shouldn't making, they have the right to point them out - if it's about human rights. There is no Iranian, American, Israeli, Chinese... It's not about politics. It's about the fundamental rights of my and your brothers' and sisters' no matter where they are.
Adam,
There is a different between Maryam Rajavi saying it and Fakhravar saying it. Maryam Rajavi is NOT a student leader or activist with any clout within the Iranian people or outside Iran much - beyond the circles of Guevarraesque communists. Fakhravar has a history in Iran and has been beyond doubt active in Iran about human rights and at least has some clout.
I don't know who this Fakhravar is and whether he is a monachist, which seems to be what he is blamed for, but I'm dead sure that the AN govt would find a pretext anyway and they would forge evidence against the protesters if needed.
As Arshama says, violence (and desinformation) is all they have left.
In addition, I think freedom of speech can't hurt; on the contrary, it is what Iran needs the most, and a govt led by Mousavi and Karroubi won't respect it unless a new constitution expressly grants it.
Ange paris, I hope your dream will come true!
Yes Josh, but one way or another, this regime will kill even if this Mr Fakhravar didn't exist ! there is no logic ! when AN has said that the USA attacked Irak because they knew that the 12 th imam will appear there what could we expect as logical behavor ! they are killers so they kill !
Josh,
I respect the sentiment that in cases of human rights, there is no inside or outside, however that assertion also nullifies the entire point of your essay, which I don't believe was your intention.
I'd point out that one of the justifications for the US aggression against Iraq was human rights violations by Saddam Hussein's regime. Hyperbole aside, I mention this only to show that it is very easy to claim an interest in human rights in order to absolve yourself of moral, ethical, or legal responsibilities, whether as a state planning a military invasion, or as an analyst commenting on foreign politics. To wit, the Obama administration has been quite critical of human rights violations by the Iranian regime, so I take it the US government has your full blessing to pursue any policy goals in pursuit of human rights, up to and including regime change? Why not?
In order for your piece to have a foundation, or for it to make any sense for that matter, you'll need to come down firmly on one principle or another. Either there is an Inside and Outside, and as the headline states, Outsiders can harm the Insiders, or as you stated in your comment, there is no Inside or Outside, and you really have no position other than saying the protesters should listen to you (or whoever you deem worthy) and not Fakhravar (or whoever you deem unworthy).
So which is it? Is this a principled stand against harmful outside intervention, or a personal screed against an activist with whom you have disagreements? You can't have both.
--UJ
Seems much more than simply being wrong. The guy looks quite dangerous. There's a Taming-Process gone through at such dungeons that SOMETIMES works; people come out as now-on-manipulated to act out according to some scheme to penetrate in return for a petro-dollar-funded lucrative deal package that can also include living a comfy life in the west. If not kept a close eye on by those who CAN, regret will be a remedy came in too late when the horrible consequences of the PROJECT are REAPED!
UJ
Your inside and outside is too complicated ! there are iranians putting their hands in the "dough" to reach the victory respecting their own ideals but all the roads lead to Rome !! this is the democracy, free thoughts , free parties, free choices of the "people", so the" power of the people ".
@Barry:
I must apologize for my bad English, my words can be misunderstood.
Formulated in another way: If there is any evidence against her and MKO (or anybody else for that matter) she must be prepared to stand a (democratic and fair) trial, if the people sees a need to prosecute her (as I said). If she wants to come back she must accepts the given punishment, if any.
Button line: in my opinion MKO must be given the same rights as anybody else, but any past crime, if any, should not be forgotten.
And for the record, I do not support this regime (or the old one).
Hi Heidar
Thanks for the reply - and I am very pleased to see your final sentence :)
I understand that MKO seems to generate a lot of "passion" (both positive and negative), even anger from Iranians - but I am wondering about so-called "crimes" committed by non-Regime Iranians over the past 30 years. There are things that the MKO did many years ago, and also things that other Iranians are doing today, that the current Regime consider to be "crimes" (certainly as crimes against the current Regime and current Constitution) -- but would they then also be considered to be crimes by a new democratic Iranian Government???
Barry