What’s missing from the BBC’s report on Iranian elections?
posted at 11:12 am on April 26, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
The BBC reports today on the election run-off in Iran, in which the “conservatives” prevailed over the “reformists” and now hold an overwhelming majority in their parliament. Unfortunately, Auntie Beeb reports this as if it wasn’t a foregone conclusion, thanks to election-rigging by the Guardian Council. The British broadcaster glosses over the fact that the GC disqualified almost 2,000 so-called reformers before the elections:
Iran’s conservatives have consolidated their victory in the country’s parliamentary elections, after taking more seats in a run-off.
Conservatives now have 69% of all seats, reformists 16% and independents over 14%, the interior ministry says.
Eighty-two seats in which no candidate managed to win 25% of the vote in last month’s first round were contested.
The first round had already given conservatives a big majority, but many are critical of President Ahmadinejad.
Many reformist candidates had been disqualified from standing in the election by the country’s non-elected Guardian Council.
Many? Even NPR puts the number on it, showing the scope of the GC’s rigging to get exactly the result the BBC reports. Their disqualifications eliminated over 20% of the field, leaving Iranian voters little choice but to endorse the ruling clique’s politics. These elections are as free and fair as Cuba’s, where the only people allowed on the ballot are those who pass the Fidel Castro test of loyalty to the junta.
The BBC completely fails to mention another inconvenient fact: the Guardian Council holds all of the real power in Iran. The parliament has limited authority to handle day-to-day matters, but all policy and strategic planning gets handled by the mullahcracy. They handpick their parliaments like they hand-pick their presidents — to serve their interests and to act as a buffer for popular discontent.
That’s what makes their assertion that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad faces problems because of the parliamentary elections so ignorant. If Ahmadinejad has problems, it’s not with the parliament but with the mullahs of the Guardian Council. Ahmadinejad has lost popular support, and so the mullahs have rigged the assembly to allow a release of that discontent and criticism. It serves as a way to keep the pressure low so that the Iranians don’t push the mullahs up against the wall in a counter-revolution.
Ahmadinejad may get ousted in the next presidential election, not because the parliament will diminish him, but because the mullahcracy might consider him a liability at home and abroad. His successor will owe his position to the same forces that put Ahmadinejad, an obscure mayor, into the office in the first place — and those forces have nothing to do with the Iranian people.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
When is the BBC not shilling for tyrants and despots?
Badger in KC on April 26, 2008 at 11:25 AM
Well, what with the super delegates deciding who the Dem nominee will be, I do not see a HUGE difference in political philosophy. Manipulation by any other name is still manipulation.
jeanie on April 26, 2008 at 11:28 AM
The guardian council is controlled by Khamenie. It’s a perfect Muslim government, one man rule.
BL@KBIRD on April 26, 2008 at 11:32 AM
He was mayor of Tehran, hardly obscure.
aengus on April 26, 2008 at 11:32 AM
Total election fraud, and the Beeb reports it as a kind of understandable inconvenience.
I guess one fraud cannot recognize another.
profitsbeard on April 26, 2008 at 11:49 AM
Elections? Where’s Jimmy Carter? Did he validate the election results? If not, then the election is a shame and they will need to have a do over.
Weebork on April 26, 2008 at 11:53 AM
BBC Beyond Bull Crap
I find the same crowd that swoons over NPR is also weak kneed about the BBC, more preachin’ to the choir!
dmann on April 26, 2008 at 12:40 PM
With the (D)emocrat party cheerleaders of the MainStreamMedia spouting the lie that Bush was “selected-not-elected” you would think they might have something to say about this… their silence is just another brick-in-the-wall demonstrating (D)emocrats, and the partisan MainStreamMedia, hate democracy.
DANEgerus on April 26, 2008 at 12:47 PM
Imagine a US Government where the (Judicial branch) Supreme Court chooses the leaders of the (Legislative branch) Senate and it’s committee chairs, the House and it’s committee chairs, the (Executive branch) President, and all of his cabinate positions. Those positions that are voted on by the people, well, the Judicial branch gets to select which names appear on the ballot.
Viola…Iran.
percysunshine on April 26, 2008 at 12:47 PM
Actually the election summary on the BBC page you link to says that 40% of the applicants were rejected by the GC. What are you crying about?
lexhamfox on April 26, 2008 at 1:00 PM
BBC’s evil, please ignore the expose on UN corruption, etc etc etc..
..And yes, I’ll go find the friggin’ link in the morning..
Reaps on April 26, 2008 at 1:37 PM
That’s what’s so wonderful about dictatorships (or oligarchy, or whatever). You don’t have to have an election to determine the will of the people, you just have to ask the Grand Poobah’s. (To paraphrase Jimmy Carter)
29Victor on April 26, 2008 at 1:59 PM
…and I love seeing this again.
Conservatives = bad guys.
I was reading some text the other day that briefly discussed the French Revolution. At the beginning of the revolution it referred to the evil monarchy as “conservatives” and the revolutionaries as “liberals.” But after the Reign of Terror, suddenly the revolutionaries were “conservatives” and The Directory were “reformers.”
29Victor on April 26, 2008 at 2:08 PM
The BBC is an absolute disgrace and the best argument against state-funded media in the world. When it comes to abject bias it puts CNN, MSNBC, and FOX in the shade. The sense of entitlement engendered by being given other people’s money (collected through a ludicrous tv tax in the UK) has robbed them of any interest in producing vaguely impartial news and otherwise high quality output as they have no need to compete with anyone.
The entire organisation should be privatised or disbanded – there is no excuse for a taxpayer funded western media organisation that represents nothing so much as Al Jazeera. BBC reporter Orla Guerin crying over Yasser Arafat’s funeral really told you all you needed to know about the BBC.
Ares on April 26, 2008 at 2:14 PM
Not at all surprising-the Beeb started a partnership with NPR way back in the early 1990s. It started with them partnering with the flagship station in Boston, and it was all downhill from there.
Coincidentally, that’s about the same time Auntie Beeb went into the loo.
Del Dolemonte on April 26, 2008 at 2:21 PM
Yeah, let’s make it a commercial station. That’ll encourage objectivity. Maybe all you cheeto-stained blog critics should go to Iran to cover the elections if you think you can do it better.
Grow Fins on April 26, 2008 at 2:37 PM
I thought the coverage was fine. As lexhamfox point out, Ed didn’t even read the article fully.
Still the BBC ought to be made a commercial station just for the fact that its wrong to charge the British public money to fund a partisan, leftist news channel.
Would you, as a lib, want your tax money to pay for Fox News?
aengus on April 26, 2008 at 3:46 PM
Grow Fins:
You may not have noticed, but Ed just did do better… and from home, too.
Of course, you didn’t notice, because it doesn’t fit your iron-clad preconceptions.
Merovign on April 26, 2008 at 4:14 PM
His successor will owe his position to the same forces that put Ahmadinejad, an obscure mayor, into the office in the first place — and those forces have nothing to do with the Iranian people.
Will Obama ever recognize this fact?
winemkr on April 26, 2008 at 7:52 PM
No wonder the Beeb loves Obama so much. Obama/Chicago = Ahmadinejad/Iran. He’s a perfect fit.
nukemhill on April 26, 2008 at 7:55 PM
Yeah, that about sums it up. Kind of a “dog bites man” story.
theregoestheneighborhood on April 26, 2008 at 10:17 PM
Good description.
theregoestheneighborhood on April 26, 2008 at 10:19 PM
Just fixed that for you.
Fox and MSNBC are accountable at the very least to their shareholders and advertisers.
The BBC is accountable only nominally to the british government of the day.
Ares on April 27, 2008 at 8:53 AM