{"id":1321,"date":"2010-06-06T15:11:03","date_gmt":"2010-06-06T15:11:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/hopoi.org\/?p=1321"},"modified":"2010-06-06T15:11:03","modified_gmt":"2010-06-06T15:11:03","slug":"iran-reform-and-revolution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/?p=1321","title":{"rendered":"Iran: Reform and Revolution"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"english\">\n<p><span style=\"font-variant: small-caps;\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignleft size-medium wp-image-1081\" title=\"8mars2\" src=\"http:\/\/hopoi.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/8mars2-257x300.jpg\" alt=\"8mars2\" width=\"257\" height=\"300\" \/>Recent news about Iran<\/span> has been dominated by U.S. attempts to increase sanctions, and one  could be forgiven for thinking the world hegemonic capitalist power is  preparing war against a major nuclear power. The reality is far  different: all the fuss is about a country where nine months of mass  protests have not only weakened the state but also divided the ruling  circles, making reconciliation at the top impossible. We are talking of a  country where neoliberal policies and sanctions have created a serious  economic crisis, with inflation projections of 50 percent this spring  and youth unemployment estimated at 70 percent. So why are the U.S. and  world media obsessed with the \u201cthreat posed by Iran\u201d? \u2014 a threat that  must be curtailed with \u201csevere\u201d sanctions or war? And what is the future  for the protest movement in the midst of all this?<\/p>\n<p>Current threats against Iran have little to do with nuclear  issues. Iran is still two to five years away from achieving nuclear  weapons capability. The drive for new sanctions cannot be understood  unless one looks at the history of U.S. relations with Iran\u2019s Islamic  regime. The 1979 revolution deprived Washington of one of its most  important allies in the Middle East, and the world superpower cannot be  seen to be losing control in such a strategic area. Iran\u2019s territorial  waters include the Straits of Hormuz through which 40 percent of the  world\u2019s seaborne oil shipments flow. Also, at a time of world economic  crisis the United States and its allies need a place to assert their  authority. Yet since the launch of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq they  have inadvertently increased Iran\u2019s regional influence and strength.<\/p>\n<p>The continuation of the conflict has another major cause.  Iran\u2019s Islamic regime has relied on crises and foreign enemies to  survive. Otherwise how could it explain its failure to achieve any of  the basic demands of 1979 after 31 years in power? The \u201cexternal\u201d enemy  is also essential for justifying continued repression.<\/p>\n<p>Iranian workers and political activists (with the possible  exception of supporters of the former Shah) are unanimous: new  \u201ccrippling\u201d sanctions, bombing Iranian nuclear sites, or a military  attack would be a disaster. Sanctions will let the regime off the hook,  as the regime will blame severe economic conditions entirely on the  embargo.<\/p>\n<p>In April of this year Washington unveiled its new nuclear  policy, which limits its use of nuclear weapons but excludes from its  pledge \u201coutliers\u201d such as Iran and North Korea. Protests and  demonstrations inside Iran should be seen within this context. The  protests continue due to the tenacity and courage of thousands of  Iranians, though more sporadically in the face of severe repression. But  everyone, from government to \u201creformists\u201d to revolutionary opposition,  now agrees that the protests are no longer about who should be  \u201cpresident,\u201d but about the very existence of the religious state.<\/p>\n<p>Reports from some recent protests suggest that for the first  time in the last 30 years many women demonstrators didn\u2019t wear  head-scarves or hijabs. On December 27, 2009, security forces at a  number of locations had to retreat, as demonstrators burned police  vehicles and <em>basij<\/em> posts and erected barricades. Videos show  instances where police and <em>basij<\/em> were captured and detained by  demonstrators and three police stations in Tehran were briefly occupied.  Demonstrators also set fire to Tehran\u2019s Bank Saderat.<\/p>\n<p>Since early 2010 <em>basij<\/em> and Revolutionary Guards have  been unleashed to further impose an atmosphere of terror. Hundreds have  been incarcerated, arrested worker activists have been fired, and  leftists have been rounded up and in some cases issued death sentences.<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong>Conservative Divisions<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-variant: small-caps;\">Despite the bravado<\/span> of  Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, the demonstrations of 2009-10 have divided  the conservatives. While supporters of Ahmadinejad openly call for more  arrests and even execution of political opponents, the parliamentary  \u201cprincipalists\u201d preach caution.<\/p>\n<p>In January 2010, a parliamentary committee publicly blamed  Tehran\u2019s former prosecutor, Saeed Mortazavi, a close ally of  Ahmadinejad\u2019s, for the death of three prisoners arrested in June. The  committee found that Mortazavi had confined 147 opposition supporters  and 30 criminals to a cell measuring only 70 square meters. The inmates  were frequently beaten and spent days without food or water.<\/p>\n<p>Ali Motahhari, a prominent fundamentalist parliamentarian, told  the magazine <em>Iran Dokht<\/em>: \u201cUnder the current circumstances,  moderates should be in charge of the country\u2019s affairs.\u201d He suggested  holding Ahmadinejad accountable for the prison deaths and for fuelling  the post-election turmoil. Iranian state television broadcasts debates  between \u201cradical\u201d and \u201cmoderate\u201d conservatives, in which some blame  Ahmadinejad for the crisis. There are two reasons for this dramatic  change in line:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li> The winter demonstrations were a turning point, in that both  conservatives and \u201creformists\u201d came to realize how the anger and  frustration of ordinary Iranians was taking revolutionary forms.<\/li>\n<li>The principalists are responding to a number of \u201cproposals\u201d by  leading \u201creformists\u201d \u2014 as a last attempt to save the Islamic Republic.  Fearful of revolution, \u201creformists\u201d \u2014 from June 2009 presidential  candidate Mir-Hossein Moussavi to former president Mohammad Khatami \u2014  have made conciliatory statements, and the moderate conservatives have  responded positively.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>In a clear sign that \u201creformists\u201d have heard the cry of  revolution, Moussavi\u2019s initial response to the winter 2009  demonstrations was to distance himself from them, emphasizing that  neither he nor Mehdi Karroubi had called for them. His January 1  statement \u201cFive stages to resolution\u201d was a signal to both his  supporters and opponents that this was truly the last chance to save the  regime.<\/p>\n<p>Western reportage of the statement concentrated on his comment  \u201cI am ready to sacrifice my life for reform.\u201d Iranians are well known  for their love of \u201cmartyrdom,\u201d from Ashura to the Fedayeen Islam in  1946, to the Marxist Fedayeen (1970s-80s). Iranians have been mesmerized  by the Shia concept of martyrdom, a yearning to put their lives at risk  for what they see as a \u201crevolutionary cause.\u201d But Moussavi will no  doubt go down in history as the first Iranian to put his life on the  line for the cause of \u201creform\u201d and compromise!<\/p>\n<p>Moussavi\u2019s plan was seen as a compromise because it did not  challenge the legitimacy of the current president and \u201cpresents a way  out of the current impasse,\u201d demanding more freedom for the \u201creformist\u201d  politicians, activists and press, as well as accountability of  government forces, while reaffirming allegiance to the constitution of  the Islamic regime, as well as the existing \u201cjudicial and executive  powers.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Moussavi\u2019s statement was followed on January 4 by a \u201c10-point  proposal\u201d from the self-appointed \u201cideologues\u201d in exile of Iran\u2019s  Islamic \u201creformist\u201d movement: Akbar Ganji, Abdolkarim Soroush, Mohsen  Kadivar, Abdolali Bazargan and Ataollah Mohajerani.[1] Fearful that  Moussavi\u2019s plan will be seen as too much of a compromise, the five call  for the resignation of Ahmadinejad and fresh elections under the  supervision of a new independent commission to replace that of the  Guardian Council. Later Khatami and another former president, Ali Akbar  Rafsanjani, publicly declared their support for the compromise, while  condemning \u201cradicals and rioters.\u201d Khatami went further, insulting  demonstrators who called for the overthrow of the Islamic regime.<\/p>\n<p>All in all, winter was a busy time for Iran\u2019s \u201creformists,\u201d  terrified by the radicalism of the demonstrators and desperate to save  the clerical regime. Inevitably the reformist left, led by the Fedayeen  Majority, is submissively following the Moussavi-Khatami line. However,  inside Iran there are signs that the leadership of the Green movement is  facing a serious crisis. None of the proposals address the most basic  democratic demand of growing numbers of Iranian protestors: separation  of state and religion.<\/p>\n<p>On the Iranian left, arguments about the \u201cprincipal  contradiction\u201d and \u201cstages of revolution\u201d seem to dominate current  debates. While some Maoists argue for a \u201cdemocratic stage\u201d of the  revolution, citing the relative weakness of the organized working class,  the Coordinating Committee for the Setting Up of Workers\u2019 Organizations  (<em>Comite Hahamhangi<\/em>) points out that the dominant contradiction  in Iran, a country where 70 percent of the population lives in urban  areas, is between labor and capital. They say that the level and depth  of workers\u2019 struggles show radicalism and levels of organization and  that the Iranian working class is the only force capable of delivering  radical democracy.<\/p>\n<p>Leftwing organizations and their supporters are also discussing  the lessons of the recent demonstrations. Sections of the police and  soldiers are refusing to shoot demonstrators and the issue of organizing  radical conscripts in order to divide and reduce the power of the  state\u2019s repressive forces must be addressed. In some working class  districts around major cities the organization of neighborhood <em>shoras<\/em> (councils) has started.<\/p>\n<p>Official celebrations of the 1979 uprising that brought down  the shah\u2019s regime stood in total contrast to the events of 31 years ago.  The state\u2019s lengthy preparations for the anniversary of the revolution  included the arrest of hundreds of political activists, hanging two  prisoners (for \u201cwaging war on god\u201d), and blocking internet and satellite  communications. The government brought busloads of <em>basij<\/em> paramilitaries and people from the provinces to boost the number of its  supporters \u2014 it considers the majority of the inhabitants of Tehran to  be opponents.<\/p>\n<p>The 48-hour internet and satellite blackout was so  comprehensive that the regime succeeded in stopping its own  international media communications. The <em>basij<\/em> blocked all  routes to Azadi Square by 9 a.m. and dispersed large crowds of  oppositionists who had gathered at Ghadessiyeh Square and other  intersections, preventing them from reaching the official celebration.  From the speakers\u2019 podium, surrounded by basij and Revolutionary Guards,  many dressed in military uniform, Ahmadinejad produced yet another  fantastic claim. In the two days since his instruction to step up  centrifuge-based uranium enrichment from 3 percent to 20 percent, this  had already been achieved! Nuclear scientists are unanimous that such a  feat is impossible. The crude display of military power, typical of the  state-organized shows that dictators have always staged, together with  the severe repression in the run-up to the anniversary, had nothing to  do with the revolution it was supposed to commemorate.<\/p>\n<p>In fact, the events of February 11, 2010 were the exact  opposite of February 10-11, 1979, when the masses took to the streets  and attacked the regime\u2019s repressive forces, when prison doors were  broken down by the crowds and political prisoners released, when army  garrisons were ransacked and the crowds took weapons to their homes and  workplaces, when the offices of the shah\u2019s secret police were occupied  by the Fedayeen, and when air force cadets turned their weapons against  their superiors, paving the way for a popular uprising.<\/p>\n<p>The show put on by our tin-pot dictators was an insult to the  memory of that uprising. Yet despite all the efforts and mobilization  preceding the official demonstration, despite the fact that confused and  at times conciliatory messages of \u201creformist\u201d leaders had disarmed  sections of the Green movement, the regime could muster only 50,000  supporters. Meanwhile tens of thousands in Tehran and other cities took  part in opposition protests \u2014 even in the streets close to Azadi Square,  despite the presence of large numbers of <em>basij<\/em>. The protests  were so loud that, according to Tehran residents, the state broadcast of  Ahmadinejad\u2019s speech had to be halted and instead TV stations showed  the flags and crowds to the accompaniment of stirring music. Fearing  that the <em>basij<\/em> might not be able to control the protesters  gathering in neighboring squares, the government decided to start its  extravagant ceremony early and then cut it short.<\/p>\n<p>Attempts at compromise by Green movement leaders in open and  secret negotiations with the office of the \u201csupreme leader\u201d failed.[2]  By early February, it was clear that no deal was in the cards. As  always, the main problem with our \u201creformists\u201d is that by remaining  loyal to the \u201csupreme leader,\u201d[3] by condemning the popular slogan,  \u201cDown with the Islamic regime,\u201d they fail to understand the mood of  those who have taken to the streets. The movement is adamant in its call  for an end to the current religious state \u2014 the repeated shouts of  \u201cDeath to the dictator\u201d are directed at the so-called \u201csupreme leader\u201d  himself.<\/p>\n<p>The February protests marked a setback for Moussavi and  Karroubi \u2014 not just in their politics, but also in their tactics. First,  it is foolhardy to organize demonstrations to coincide with the  official calendar of events, as it allows the regime to plan repression  well in advance. Second, it was absurd to call on people to join the  regime\u2019s demonstrations and, third, opposition to a dictatorship cannot  simply rely on demonstrations. The state has unleashed its most brutal  forces against street protesters, and we need to consider strikes and  other acts of civil disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>A lot has been written by Persian bloggers about the \u201clack of  charisma\u201d of Moussavi and Karroubi. However, the truth is their main  problem is not personality, but dithering. This has cost them dearly at a  time when opposition to the regime in its entirety is growing. The  Islamic version of capitalism has brought about much harsher conditions  for the working class and the poor. The state\u2019s own statistics show a  constant growth in the gap between rich and poor. The impoverishment of  the middle classes, the abject poverty of the working class, the  destitution and hunger of the shantytown-dwellers \u2014 these are reasons  why the urban protests continue.<\/p>\n<p>On February 15 Hillary Clinton cited the economic and political  power of the Revolutionary Guards as a sign that \u201cIran is moving  towards a military dictatorship.\u201d Yet there is nothing new in the power  of the Revolutionary Guards. Since 1979 they have been the single most  important pillar of the state, involved in every aspect of political and  military power. What is new is their involvement in capitalist  ventures, empowered by the relentless privatization plans driven by the  IMF and World Bank.<\/p>\n<p>In recent years Revolutionary Guards have accumulated vast  fortunes through the acquisition of privatized capital \u2014 precisely the  pattern seen in the former Soviet Union and elsewhere. Those in power,  often with direct connections to military and security forces, are able  to purchase the newly privatized industries. That is the case with many  U.S. allies, yet we have not heard the State Department criticize  \u201ccreeping military dictatorships\u201d in those countries.<\/p>\n<p>No doubt, as repression increases, Iranians\u2019 hatred of the <em>basij<\/em> and Revolutionary Guards will increase. However, they don\u2019t need the  crocodile tears of the U.S. administration \u2014 indeed interventions like  those of Clinton and condemnations of the repression coming from the  U.S. and European governments tend to damage the movement. Iranians are  well aware of the kind of \u201cdemocratic havens\u201d created by the United  States in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the last thing they want is regime  change U.S.-style.<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong>Working Class Response<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-variant: small-caps;\">As repression increases<\/span> and mass demonstrations are replaced with localized protests, many  point out the significance of workers\u2019 strikes in the overthrow of the  Shah\u2019s regime and attention is turning towards the unprecedented levels  of worker protests. In the words of one labor activist, \u201ca Tsunami of  workers\u2019 strikes.\u201d[4] Even before the new sanctions, the economic  situation has worsened. Hundreds of car workers \u2014 the elite of Iran\u2019s  working class \u2014 are being sacked every week.<\/p>\n<p>The involvement of the working class in the political arena has  increased qualitatively. Four workers\u2019 organizations \u2014 the Syndicate of  Vahed Bus Workers, the Haft Tapeh sugar cane grouping, the Electricity  and Metal Workers Council in Kermanshah, and the Independent Free Union \u2014  published a joint statement declaring support for the protests and  specifying what they call the minimum demands of the working class.  These include an end to executions, release of imprisoned activists,  freedom of the press and media, the right to set up workers\u2019  organizations, job security, abolition of all misogynist legislation,  declaration of May 1 as a public holiday, and expulsion from workplaces  of government-run organizations. Meanwhile, Tehran\u2019s bus workers have  issued a call for civil disobedience to protest against the holding of  Mansour Osanloo in prison.<\/p>\n<p>Workers involved in setting up nationwide councils have issued a  radical political statement regarding what they see as the priority  demands that Iranian workers ought to raise. Emphasizing the need to  address the long-term political interests of the working class, they  also call for unity based around immediate economic and political  demands.<\/p>\n<p>There are reports of strikes and demonstrations in one of  Iran\u2019s largest industrial complexes, Isfahan\u2019s steel plant, where  privatization and contract employment have led to action by the workers.  Leftwing oil workers\/employees are reporting disillusionment with  Moussavi and the \u201creformist\u201d camp amongst fellow workers and believe  there is an opportunity to radicalize protests in this industry, which  is critical to the regime\u2019s survival.<\/p>\n<p>In March 2010, many prominent labor activists, including  Osanloo, who are currently in prison, were sacked from their jobs for  \u201cfailing to turn up at work,\u201d prompting protests in bus depots and the  Haft Tapeh sugar cane plant. In December 2009 Lastic Alborz factory  workers struck for unpaid wages. There have been protests at dozens of  other workplaces.<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong>Future of the Protests<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-variant: small-caps;\">Even if the two main factions <\/span>of the regime had achieved a compromise, it was unlikely that  such a move could have defused the movement. However Moussavi, Karroubi  and Khatami have failed to gain anything from their attempts at  \u201creconciliation\u201d; they are well aware that any additional talk of  compromise will further reduce their influence amongst protesters. That  explains recent statements by Moussavi, who in early April told a group  of reformists in Parliament that the Iranian establishment continued to  lose legitimacy: \u201cOne of the problems is that the government thinks that  it has ended the dissent by ending the street protests.\u201d[5]<\/p>\n<p>Moussavi said that people have lost confidence in the state  because of widespread corruption, incompetence and mismanagement since  the presidential election. He said the movement needed to expand its  influence among social groups like teachers and workers. \u201cOur interests  are intertwined with their interests, and we need to defend their  rights,\u201d he said. Khatami echoed this message: \u201cIf the authorities do  not come up with effective policies the coming year will be the year of  social crises.\u201d[6]<\/p>\n<p>Iran is bracing itself for another turbulent year, and most  observers believe the working class and youth will play a greater role  in the coming protests.<\/p>\n<h3>By Yassamine Mather: from <a href=\"http:\/\/newpolitics.mayfirst.org\/fromthearchives?nid=345\">New  Politics<\/a><\/h3>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Recent news about Iran has been dominated by U.S. attempts to increase sanctions, and one could be forgiven for thinking the world hegemonic capitalist power is preparing war against a major nuclear power. The reality is far different: all the fuss is about a country where nine months of mass protests have not only weakened &hellip; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/?p=1321\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Iran: Reform and Revolution&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[15,268,312,353,411,434,452,501,520,545,629,633,635,664],"class_list":["post-1321","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-articles","tag-15","tag-iran","tag-islamic-republic-of-iran","tag-khatami","tag-mehdi-karroubi","tag-mousavi","tag-nuclear","tag-protests","tag-reformists","tag-sanctions","tag-unites-states","tag-uprising","tag-usa","tag-yassamine-mather","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1321","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1321"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1321\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1321"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1321"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1321"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}