Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Not that it matters who really won

The uproar over the Iranian elections is, in effect, a storm in a teacup. Why? Because the real power is concentrated within the clique of Shi'a ayatollahs headed by the Grand Ayatollah Rafsanjani. It is they who ultimately decide which candidates are eligible in the first place. Make no mistake, if a candidate posed as much as a whim of a threat to them he'd have been cast out. So, whether Ahemdinejad or Mousavi have actually won, very little is going to change, and whatever change becomes it will be in form not in substance. Kind of like the elections in the two-party systems in western countries of today...

There is but one cause for concern, as Gray Falcon explains it:

You see, it looks very much like a "color revolution" scenario: the US-favored candidate contests election results, claims victory, and his supporters riot till the government caves in. But then, couldn't the incumbent actually steal the election knowing full well that he can paint the resulting opposition protests as a CIA/NED coup attempt, whether that is actually true or not?
...
The fact remains, however, that the technique of "democratic coup" pioneered by the Empire in Serbia - and applied elsewhere since - has made it effectively impossible to judge whether any election, anywhere, is actually legitimate.


In any case, the reports of the death of the Islamic Republic are greatly exaggerated.

No comments: