Ahmadinejad reelected, or maybe not
posted at 9:02 pm on June 12, 2009 by Allahpundit
Reuters says it’s a landslide — 66/31 with 61 percent of the ballots counted — but his opponent, Mousavi, is claiming he was cheated, an excuse he’s been pushing since before the polls opened. The White House spin is set for either outcome: If Mousavi pulls the upset, it’s a hugely significant Change that proves the Iranian public wants detente, and if Ahmadinejad holds on, it’s a meaningless exercise in faux democracy given that all ultimate power derives to the Supreme Leader. Complicating all this, of course, is the fact that only the Mahdi (and the Iranian powers that be) know what the actual vote totals are. If there really was some secret groundswell for Mousavi as a protest vote against Ahmadinejad, we might see Iranian diplomacy tack — gently — towards “wider liberties at home and a gentler face for Iran abroad,” per Mousavi’s platform. But what if the numbers are accurate? Turnout was reportedly enormous, which makes lots of sense given public dissatisfaction with how Ahmadinejad’s managed the economy but zero sense in terms of producing a runaway win for the incumbent. To blow out Mousavi by 35 points with the opposition energized and headed to the polls in droves means either (a) the vote totals are cooked or (b) frighteningly, Iranians have embraced his belligerence towards the west and endorsed the regime’s rejectionism on nuclear negotiations. The poll of Iranian public opinion that I linked Monday actually suggested the opposite, that Iranians would be willing to tolerate inspections for nukes in exchange for an economic thaw with the west. So again, how to explain these results?
Regardless of who wins, I don’t mean to oversell Mousavi as some sort of radically liberal alternative to Ahmadinejad. As with all mainstream Iranian pols, the differences here are a matter of slight degree. As Iranian PM in the 80s, he condoned the killing of Salman Rushdie and there’s an argument to be made that him winning the election would actually make Iranian nukes more likely, not less. (“A Mousavi victory’s likely effect would be to make it easier for the West to trust the Iranian regime without making the regime more worthy of trust.”) To the extent the outcome’s significant, it’s significant purely as a barometer of Iranian popular opinion, not for any tidal shift in how the country will be run. Looks pretty grim right now.
Update: Given how quick some in the media were to credit Obama’s Cairo speech with the happy outcome in Lebanon’s election, will they be equally quick to call it a failure if Ahmadinejad wins? Expect them to blame it on Iran’s media censors not having let the spirit of Hopenchange penetrate deeply enough.









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
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/06/12/iran_elections_update
Obama has made this disaster possible. After his craven performance in Cairo the Mullahs know they are free to act with impunity. And after his Rose Garden stupidity this afternoon we can hang it around his neck. Obama is a menace to the planet.
elduende on June 13, 2009 at 12:19 AM
Elduende: the regime might feel free to act with impunity, but it was only a decade ago that Iran stood on the threshold of a counter-revolution. Things have not improved in Iran since. Who knows what a stolen election could light in an unhappy population. Its the type of thing we’ve seen light revolutions in other countries.
Wolf Howling on June 13, 2009 at 12:39 AM
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/06/12/iran_elections_update
Obama this is all you bucko.
elduende on June 13, 2009 at 12:42 AM
They short circuited Rafsanjani a decade ago pretty easily. The Mullahs will not give up power without a fight. They can’t because of ethnicity. Persians make up roughly 50% of the population and they have been using Shism ruthlessly to suppress the other 50% of minorities in Iran. The Mullahs dare not empower any of these ethnicities or they are courting an epic ethnic bloodbath.
elduende on June 13, 2009 at 12:48 AM
Thanks for the update. I seem to recall that some German dude gained the Chancellorship in much the same way. Forgot the fellas name…. ;/
Limerick on June 13, 2009 at 1:30 AM
Hah. I wonder who that could have been…
elduende on June 13, 2009 at 1:36 AM
http://uskowioniran.blogspot.com/
elduende on June 13, 2009 at 2:30 AM
LOL!
elduende on June 13, 2009 at 3:16 AM
Elliott Abrams, former senior Bush administration official now with the council on foreign relations:
elduende on June 13, 2009 at 3:18 AM
So Ahmadinajad has won.
Its a setback, but then the other guy wasn’t much better. The important thing is that the only people who voted for Ahmadinajad were the poor and uneducated in the agricultural parts of the country who are expected to make the conservative vote. Those and the more extreme Iranians.
What is positive is that the younger generation are getting sick of the mismanagement of political affairs of the Iranian autocracy. Let’s face it, the only reason the Mullah’s stay in power is because they claim to be the voice of God. It’s hardly due to their competent government.
Iranians as a rule aren’t stupid. Most are smart and astute, and given a chance would be able to contribute a great deal to the world. They are being held back by dumb ideology. But if the young people are seeing this, then maybe in the long term there is something to be hopeful about.
In the meantime we have to deal with that clown Ahmadinajad for several more years yet.
dcpolwarth on June 13, 2009 at 3:47 AM
So … if I’m following this correctly, The Precedent opened his fist and the mullahs kicked him in the balls and laughed. Is that about the shape of this?
progressoverpeace on June 13, 2009 at 4:35 AM
Apparently ACORN has a well established system in place in Iran as well as the USA. Not alot of differnece between the leader there and here.
bluegrass on June 13, 2009 at 7:39 AM
Not only correct but much more eloquently put then the NYT could ever think to say it.
Cindy Munford on June 13, 2009 at 9:10 AM
So how do you know in Iran if the adults are in charge?
bluelightbrigade on June 13, 2009 at 9:53 AM
When they do what Pres. Obama wants them to do. Don’t hold your breathe.
Cindy Munford on June 13, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Or breath to normal people.
Cindy Munford on June 13, 2009 at 10:23 AM
This just in: Iranian President For Life Iminthemoodfor Abigwhompinjihad has won re-election with 105% of the vote.
Asked for comment, USA President-For-Life-Designate Barry SmokeTooMuch said, “I heartily congratulate
my 2nd cousinfor his victoryover any slight amount of freedom and liberty in our homelandin Iran.”E T Cartman on June 13, 2009 at 12:30 PM
considering the populace who’s majority is huge ala under 30 with 40% of the country between 18-30 voting age, this 65% tally is well, lays claim to the age old adage, there are lies damned lies and statistics, and in this case votes in a country in which the Mullahs control all. In Mousavi’s own home province ( tabriz) he was out polled over 2-1, that in and of itself is beyond suspicious, its a joke. Oh, Why hasn’t Carter blessed the results yet? *snicker*.
imperator on June 13, 2009 at 12:45 PM
The adherents of one mullah approved candidate are fighting the adherents of another mullah-approved candidate. Both sides should have the best of luck.
chsw
chsw on June 14, 2009 at 9:30 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2