What
You're Missing in Our Subscriber-only CounterPunch Newsletter
The Texas Wars of
Robert Gates:
On Affirmative
Action and Mexican Migrants
What's Robert
Gates's not-so-distant dirty past? Greg Moses turns over the
dirt in College Station, how Gates fought affirmative action
there and how Reagan and Bush's's slippery spook will run the
new Border War.The End of the Libération
Myth! Meet Libération, turncoat tool of neoliberalism.Pierre
Rimbert traces the decline and fall of one of radical journalism's
great hopes --the paper founded by Jean-Paul Sartre. Daniel Wolff describes how Bob Dylan
plays the music of the Apocalypse. Remember, we are funded solely
by the subscribers to the print edition of CounterPunch. Please support this
website by buying a
subscription to our newsletter, which contains fresh material you
won't find anywhere else, or by making a donation towards the
cost of this online edition. Remember contributions are tax-deductible.Click
here to make a donation. If you find our site useful please:Subscribe
Now
The World Isn't Florida and the US Isn't
Its Supreme Leader
Iran's
Elections
By BEHROOZ GHAMARI-TABRIZI
On December 15, more than 60% of Iranians
cast ballots in municipals elections. With the mounting pressure
of reformist coalitions, a remarkable number of their candidates
survived the draconian vetting processes of the clerical establishment
and turned this election into a popular vote of confidence in
Ahmadinejad's administration. Whether they succeed in wining
the majority seats in city and town councils in Tehran and other
parts of the country is not known yet. But the mere act of the
electorates' massive participation once more exhibited the resilience
of democratic institutions under the Islamic Republic in spite
of abundant social, legal, and political impediments. Had this
election occurred in an allied country of the United States,
it would have been celebrated as the highest achievement of American
foreign policy. But the Bush administration and the mainstream
media disregard elections held under an alleged "totalitarian"
state as a nonevent.
There is an expression in Persian
that if a wall's first brick is laid unevenly, it will be skewed
no matter how high it is erected. President Bush won his first
term by corrupting the votes in Florida and later by exploiting
the judicial system in the United States. This set a devastating
precedent for an administration which considers itself to be
above the law and believes it can wield its power indiscriminately
around the world. It is indeed one of most appalling ironies
that a President who assumed office fraudulently calls himself
and his entourage of neoconservative hawks the messengers of
democracy in the world. He might be right in believing that
his mission of spreading democracy in the world defines his presidency.
But the problem is that for this administration, like many others
before it, democracy means turning a nation into an American
ally. According to Bush, the world is divided into three camps:
undemocratic, countries impervious to American interests; democratic,
countries yielding to American interests; and those in between.
There is nothing novel about this strategic narcissism. American
foreign policy during the Cold War was informed by the tunnel
vision of "American interests" which compelled one
administration after another to raise the heat of the Cold War
through successive proxy wars and coup d'étatsthink
Iran 1953, Guatemala 1954, Indonesia 1967, Vietnam 1965-73, Chile
1973, Afghanistan, Angola, Nicaragua 1980s, and the list goes
on.
The United States learned the
wrong lessons in the Cold War. A nation's right to self-determination,
even at the expense of American interests, must be respected.
The US is not the Supreme Leader of the world with power to
override the outcome of elections in other countries. When the
Palestinians cast their ballots in favor of Hamas, or the Venezuelans
elect Chavez as their president, it is morally wrong and politically
bankrupt to punish them with economic sanctions or conspire to
overthrow their legitimate government because the White House
believes that the people have elected the "wrong party."
The Cold War is over, but the worldview that gave rise to it
thrives.
President Bush's advisors would
greatly benefit from reading Iranians' numerous letters to the
BBC's Persian service and interviews with Iranian daily newspapers
about why they vote or alternatively why they boycott the elections.
The majority who vote do so consciously to underline their preference
for a homegrown democracy with all its faults over an imported
American brand. One constituent wrote, "I voted to prove
that our true desire is to transform this system, and to show
that we don't need American democracy." Another letter
from Shahin Shar noted, "there is no room to breath freely,
Iran's international credibility and respect is diminishing,
and we hope that we are not on a path to war, I voted to change
this direction." "I want to know," another interviewee
from Tehran asked rhetorically, "in which other country
in the world do they have carnivals on the streets and the artists
and celebrities go to neighborhoods to encourage people to participate?"
Another woman from Golestan described her vote as a "declaration
against right-wing populism and US warmongering." Another
voter from Mashad aptly observed, "Iranians always believe
that the neighbor's grass is greener [] I am 62 years old and
I vote proudly in all elections. I exercise this right and feel
sorry for those who fall short of their responsibilities and
wait for some invisible hand to come and rescue them. I know
that they are inexperienced and do not have any idea about other
parts of the world. I ask them to look at the Arab countries,
all of those with good relations with the US and tell me that
they are more democratic than we are." A young voter from
Shiraz called the election a "velvet revolution" that
will strengthen "local decision-making and non-governmental
organizations."
Since President Bush has announced
that he has been on a listening tour, maybe he ought to extend
the length of this most unusual campaign and listen to the words
and actions of the people he wants to rescue in Iran.
Behrooz Ghamari is a professor of history and sociology
at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. He is the author
of the forthcoming book, Islam and Dissent in Postrevolutionary
Iran. He can be reached at bghamari@uiuc.edu
CounterPunch
Speakers Bureau Sick of sit-on-the-Fence speakers, tongue-tied and timid?
CounterPunch Editors Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St Clair
are available to speak forcefully on ALL the burning issues,
as are other CounterPunchers seasoned in stump oratory. Call
CounterPunch Speakers Bureau, 1-800-840-3683. Or email beckyg@counterpunch.org.
