Iran… A Snowball or a Second Revolution?

The people are divided. The government is divided. The religious establishment is divided. Ahmadinejad is faking silence while waiting for the “justification for salvation” from the Guide of the Islamic Republic Ali Khamenei. Mousavi and Karroubi have so far managed to withstand the accusations of treason after they refused to admit the results of the elections, thus leading the slogans and hopes of a new Iranian generation to the street and the whole world.

As Iran is bleeding and opening new wounds in the Middle East, Ahmadinejad can not but condemn those interfering in his country’s affairs. His logic is an odd one as he is the “godfather of interfering” in other peoples’ affairs. This means that the spells have backfired against the wizard after he interfered in Lebanon, Iraq, Palestine, Yemen, Pakistan, and attacked Gulf states.

Ever since the Iranian presidential elections degenerated, after their “rigged” results, into a wave of bloody protests, President Ahmadinejad has distanced himself from the lights while his authorities carried out a campaign of oppression and enforced a media blackout to hide the reality of what is going on in the Iranian street after he managed, with Khamenei’s support, to plant officials loyal to him in the main sovereign and sensitive positions.

The whole governing body has thus operated according to an ideological policy. As analysts estimate, Ahmadinejad replaced 10,000 civil servants to reinforce those who support him in the executive branch of the government.

The sense of suffocation is spreading internally and things are getting more complicated. After the Ahmadinejad-Mousavi divisions that wracked the religious institution during the elections, a large number of conservative MPs, including Speaker Ali Larijani, boycotted the reception held by Ahmadinejad to celebrate his victory.

This sends out a signal that Ahmadinejad’s second term will face internal difficulties and challenges as well as foreign ones, especially concerning his relations with the parliament.

The reformist Mir Hussein Mousavi must be commended for holding on to his stances. He even grew more courageous and waged a vicious attack on his opponents, accusing the Iranian authorities of “rigging” the results and “shedding the blood” of the protestors when he said: “I am not prepared to give up the rights of the Iranian people, whose blood was shed unjustly, for personal reasons or for fear of threats.”

Mousavi added in a statement published by the website of his newspaper “Kalima”: “The latest pressure was aimed at forcing me to give up my call for annulling the elections. There was much falsification and I am prepared to prove that those who stand behind the falsification also stood alongside the inciters behind the riots which took place recently and shed the blood of the citizens.”

At the same time, Mahdi Karroubi continued to call for more protests and sit-ins and for maintaining the fight against the results of the elections “legally” while affirming that “those who gave their votes for Ahmadinejad are a minority and they cannot impose themselves on the majority.”

Mistaken are those who believe that the accusations leveled by the ruling Iranian authorities at the “rabble-rousers” of receiving money from the American Central Intelligence Agency are aimed at the United States.

The purpose behind these accusations is to oppress the interior, and frighten it with charges of accusation so that it would be easier to arrest the protestors and prosecute them under the title of “betraying the nation.”

Khamenei is wrong to support Ahmadinejad, because the Iranian crisis is growing and taking a dangerous turn in the hearts of the new generation, even if he defeats them “temporarily” with his oppressive policies and bullets.

This was expressed by some supporters of Ahmadinejad, like the mayor of Tehran Muhammad Baqer Qalibaf, a former general in the Revolutionary Guard and a close adherent of Khamenei, who said that “part of the people are asking questions about the elections, and this cannot be settled with force.”

Despite my differences with Iran’s policies and intentions, Tehran presented a form of “exciting” democracy when it opened the ballot boxes to the people on a memorable day and allowed the people to witness live debates between the presidential candidates.

What is certain is that the current Iranian crisis showed the extent of the popular disgruntlement and opposition to Ahmadinejad’s policies, especially among the intellectuals and the new generation. This crisis also raised many questions about Iran’s nuclear future and the Wilayat Al-Faqih. But will Tehran change its internal and foreign policies? I don’t think so. Ahmadinejad will stick to his ideological policy against his neighbors and to his offensive statements against the westerners. He will continue to try to expand at the expense of others and their interests.

Ahmadinejad remained an “unwanted” burden with half of the younger generations opposing his policies and disregarding his statements after they found their goal in Mousavi’s reformist slogans.

Will the snowball of the “popular anger” against Khamenei and Ahmadinejad stop, or will it keep rolling towards a second Iranian revolution, or will it die because of the oppression and murders?

I believe that the answer will not appear now or later, but only after four lean years.