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)
Everybody in Iran has internet and access to facebook, youtube, etc. There is not "one single tool" to organize the protests, exactly like there is not one single person doing all this. It's a nation's dynamics.
fakhravar is not a student leader , the cases he had was not even political , he picked up some stuff when he was in prison and now he like anybody else tries to tell a story to get some attention and maybe some financial gain.
you mentioned you don't wanna get into the discussion if his a student leader or not, so let's assume he is not then your whole arguement falls apart.
and bring us to the fact that this is nothing new, everybody wants to claim the credit for the uprising ,
mko are doing it , so are leftists and even monarchists are kind of trying to get some credits.
the main thing is that the regime doesn't care about if it was premeditated move or not ,the movement already crossed thee red line, they challenged SL and to be honest regime is playing the isalm card by telling that demonstrators are "mohreb" and all those nice names islam has for non believers.
so I think the movement in Iran knows well what they are dealing with.
what I feel is that despite of difference in way and thoughts of Iranian people abroad and in the country I think we have one thing in common and that is the need to change the system.
so your worries is much ado about nothing maybe?
Folks,
First thanks to Barry for spelling out some of the prerequisites for a functioning democracy. He's right on.
Second, this is the first movement that I'm aware of in all of Iran's history where people are asking for civil and human rights rather than following a "cult hero" (Mosadegh, Shah, Khomeini, Massoud/Maryam Rajavi, etc.). I really believe that the Green movement will continue even without Moussavi & Karroubi and if either of them ever reneged on demanding our universal rights, they'd immediately lose people's following.
Third, we should accept that among the opposition, some have different philosophies or perhaps are less politically sophisticated. The key thing is that anyone who (1) supports our inalienable civil and human rights and strong democratic institutions, and (2) agrees that the future of the country should be approved by referendum has a place in the Green movement. That extends to the full list of people enumerated by Ange Paris. Let's not fight among ourselves until we can do it in a civilized way through the ballot box and free elections in a truly democratic Iran.
UJ,
If your comments are not derived from an uncontrollable urge for the "sport" of argumentation,
then by slightly rectifying the title in to : How Outside "the Green movement" “Help” Can Hurt the Green Movement , the writer's point may seem more clear to you ?
When one shares the same ethics and philosophy as the Green Movement , then one is an insider - regardless of one's nationality or geographical whereabout and vise versa .
An activist Green Lurker ,
Thanks for a yet another great comment .
Peace Maker,
The author is clearly on to a good point, and thus I see no harm in prodding into the logic that produced said good point. I agree with the point that outside interference can harm the reform movement, but not with the premise that anyone, the author included, can arbitrarily decide who is inside and who is outside. The result of the apparent logic is that the author goes against his own point - "outside help is bad, except when it's me offering advice."
Does that explain my call for clarification?
And again, may I presume from your definition of who is a Green Movement insider, that is those who hold the same vague democratic ideals, that this includes the US Government, including its diplomatic, military, and intelligence agencies?
--UJ
UJ,
If your comments are not derived from an uncontrollable urge for the "sport" of argumentation,
then by slightly rectifying the title in to : How Outside "the Green movement" “Help” Can Hurt the Green Movement , the writer's point may seem more clear to you ?
When one shares the same ethics and philosophy as the Green Movement , then one is an insider - regardless of one's nationality or geographical whereabout and vise versa .
An activist Green Lurker ,
Thanks for a yet another great comment .
Barry,
MKO is a long subject to talk about over here, but what most (non government) Iranians blame them for , is for their act of treason when they took arms with the Iraqi army and fought against the Iranian army during the war .
Hi Peacemaker
I have to admit that I know more about the Iranian regime(and their crimes) since 1979 - than I do about the MKO.
I also know a bit about the german Nazi Regime, who were supported by the Vichy French Regime. There were French people who fought against the Vichy French Regime alongside other enemies of the Nazis and Vichy French. The Vichy French thought of these Resistance fighter as "traitors" - but they (and the Allied forces) did not think of themselves this way. They believed they were Nationalists.
History is always written by the victors - and so far, Iranian history has been written by the Iranian Regime. But that may change.
Barry
Peacemaker
I also believe that some parallels could be drawn between the Italian Resistance movement and MKO - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_resistance_movement
Were the Italian partisans "traitors"? If Hitler and Mussolini had won instead of losing, then they definitely would be recorded in history as "traitors". But - Hitler and Mussolini LOST!! :)
Barry
Oups, Sorry for the double post . I don't know what happened there ! ; /
UJ,
"but not with the premise that anyone, the author included, can arbitrarily decide who is inside and who is outside."
I totally agree with you . But here the author ( although not an insider ) Does prove his point about Fakhravar. Doesn't he ?
"And again, may I presume from your definition of who is a Green Movement insider, that is those who hold the same vague democratic ideals, that this includes the US Government, including its diplomatic, military, and intelligence agencies?"
Here you totally lost me with your wrong presumption ! vague democratic ideals ???
This is what YOU say and of course I do NOT see any point to discuss that. But how on earth did you find common ethics and interests between US government and the Green movement ??? You are not serious , are you ? Never-mind .... ..
Barry,
The aggressor in Iran-Iraq war was Iraq, backed by the rich Arab states
and most western countries .
In this case Hitler was Saddam Hussein . I let you figure out who Mussolinis were.
MKO killed simple soldiers who were defending their country against the aggressors.
Can you picture Iran in the scenario in which Saddam would have been the conqueror. I DON'T EVER want to picture that , even with the Islamic Republic.
Peace Maker,
My point with referencing the US government is that as long as we can arbitrarily decide who is inside and outside, so can anybody else. Human Rights is fine, but the CIA also employs humans, brothers and sisters of the Iranian people as its been said.
I realize how tempting, and easy, it is to twist around the definition of insiders and outsiders of the Green Movement. It's enticing to think of ourselves as freedom fighters, that we're on the inside, and all the bad people we don't like are on the outside. But we have to be clear-headed enough to realize the folly in that.
Insiders are Iranian citizens, folks with a recognized, legitimate claim to the determination of that country's future. It's not you, it's not me, it's not general Human Rights activists, it's Iranians and Iranians only.
That definition might seem limiting to you, but it allows you plenty of credibility to make your condemnations of both the deplorable regime crackdown as well as the counter-productive, and arguably harmful, interference by outsiders to the movement.
If, however, you arbitrarily decide that an insider is anyone who subscribes to certain beliefs, or has whatever convictions, then you are deliberately and publicly opening the door for others, the CIA, the Monarchists, whoever, to also decide that it is they who are insiders, that they have a stake in the reform movement, that they can decide the future of Iran. Except they don't fight with facebook and youtube, they fight with bombs, cruise missiles, and drone airplanes.
If that's not what you want, regime change, then stop disrespecting the legitimacy and sovereignty of Iranians. How they conduct themselves in their revolution is their business. You'll do more good for the reform movement standing on that principle than you will as an armchair minuteman in the velvet revolution.
--UJ
In my article, "War Over Words in Iran: Is Iran Facing Revolution or Reform? The Green Movement May Depend on the Answer," I argue that many bloggers and journalists can do a better job at keeping objectivity in the covering of such an emotionally charged story.
I also argue that it doesn't matter. The current Regime in Iran has proven, time and again, that it will do whatever it feels like it has to do in order to maintain power and control. Period. So far, they think that massive crackdowns and arrests of figureheads like Mousavi will spark further chaos. They're probably justified in their fears. The reality is, whether Mousavi or the rest of us like it or not, that the police fired first and the protesters fought back. Police stations and motorcycles burned. Pictures of Khamenei have been torn, "death to the dictator" has been chanted, and no amount of journalistic restraint or objectivity will put that cat back in the bag.
Read the rest at http://jamesthehype.blogspot.com/2010/01/war-over-words-in-iran.html#comments
Peacemaker
yes - it is no simple matter. I can certainly understand why Iranians would think of MKO as traitors - in regard to their "alliance" with Saddam Hussein.
But I have a picture in my mind - pretend for the moment that we are ordinary Germans during WW2. We are not Nazis, we are not even Nazi sympathisers - but we are good Germans. When somebody attacks Germany, we defend the country. We fight for it. BUT - are we fighting for the country, or are we fighting for the Nazi regime who runs the country or both?? At the time of the Iran-Iraq war, I can imagine that most Iranians supported and fought for both their country AND the Islamic regime-- and regarded MKO as traitors. But what about now?? - are the Iranians living outside Iran who are fighting the Iranian Regime now, in whatever way they can, "traitors"?????
Barry
UJ,
"but the CIA also employs humans, brothers and sisters of the Iranian people as its been said."
Yes, as you say , CIA , KGB & co. would not listen to you and they will keep mingling with the Iranian affairs . Iran's painful history is filled with manipulated or sold out citizens standing on the way of true independence and democracy in their country. Precisely for this very reason one has the right to denounce interventions
that disserve the Green movement whose principle purpose is to reform and not as you put it , to conduct a revolution -let alone a velvet one .
The Green movement is caught between the insider totalitarian system and the outsider aggressors with bombs and drone airplanes.
whoever can help David in his combat with this double headed Goliath is welcome to do so. Cause this David's victory can spark a new and more balanced order in international relations and politics. My guess is that the genuine help will be recognized in time and the false ones dispelled away.
Thank God for Scott Lucas and social media for trying their best in giving us an objective reading of the news and for journalists like Roger Cohen who, regarding Iran, dare criticize Denis Ross and his alike in the mainstream media.
Barry,
"most Iranians supported and fought for both their country AND the Islamic regime"
Where did you get this statistics from ? !!!!
"yes – it is no simple matter. I can certainly understand why Iranians would think of MKO as traitors – in regard to their “alliance” with Saddam Hussein."
Well, if you really do understand , then there is no need for further discussion.
@Barry
I understand there is some ambiguity in defining which actions are to be labeled as "crime". But MKO has not only been fighting against the regime, but also the Iraninan people. Even Reza Pahlavi offered to fight (as a pilot) with the Islamic Republic against Saddam in 1980's (according to wikipedia at least).
But personally I think that the must disturbing thing is that they supported Saddam and even helped him fight down the Iraqi uprising (MKO killed kurds in northern Iraq). They were only civilians who wanted to get rid of Saddam, a dictator much worse than Khamenei. (There have also been different incidents of bombings in Iran with civilian casualties where MKO was blamed.)
Many MKO members claim that most of these allegations are lies and propaganda by the Islamic republic, and to some extend I believe them. Therefore, if there is any popular demand (which I hope and think there will be), it is crucial to take up these cases and get clarity.
Having people coming back to a democratic Iran makes no sense, if they supported Saddam (much worse dictator) to stay in power and cracked down on innocent Iraqis. After getting rid of Khamenei, we don't want having new Saddam's ruling Iran. (Who knows, maybe it turns out that MKO is innocent?)
But I think, we are getting too much out of topic now! :)