Iran: The Logic of Events

June 12, last Saturday, marks the first anniversary of Iran’s disputed election. It was followed by the brutal repression of a mass protest that had brought millions of people into the streets in a spontaneous outburst of anger and insistent demands for democracy. A year later, Saturday’s anniversary was marked by sullen acquiescence by the people and a show trial of seven leaders of the persecuted Baha’i minority. They were accused of spying for Israel. But President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s government continues to be nervous about its hold on power. It has been steadily tightening its grip on the media and even warning foreign exiles not to speak out. Its big problem is the economy. With falling oil revenues, it could, fairly rapidly, run out of money.

After months of negotiations, the United Nations Security Council voted to impose a fourth round of sanctions with Russia and China assenting, but not unanimously.

There are innumerable scenarios for the future. The worst case scenario is that the sanctions will consolidate Ahmadinejad’s hold on power and that his repression will continue for years to come, notwithstanding Napoleon’s dictum that you can do anything with bayonets except sit on them. The best case scenario is that sooner rather than later the people will shake off the totalitarian system in a non-violent revolution.

The logic of events suggests that this scenario is probably the right one. Since Iran has a largely youthful and highly educated population of 70 million, a revolution by the Internet-savvy generation is highly likely.

When speculating about the future of human, rather than natural events, one can only talk about probabilities. It is certain that the sun will rise tomorrow. But it is only probable that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s days are numbered.

In the past, the transition from tradition to modernity would have proceeded more quickly and more smoothly had there been no imperial domination of Iran.

As early as 1906, a Constitutionalist Revolution succeeded in establishing a parliament to curtail the absolutist powers of the monarchy. But Anglo-Russian interference nipped it in the bud. Nearly half a century later, in 1951, Mossadegh was elected and attempted to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, later known as BP (!!!). He was overthrown in a CIA-sponsored coup in 1953. This was followed by the regime of the pro-American Pahlavi dynasty, which in 1979 was overthrown by a popular revolution with promises of democratic change.

Instead, Islamic militants established a totalitarian state under the leadership of Ayatollah Khomeini through a reign of terror and violence. The devastating 1980-1988 war with Iraq – in which the West supported Saddam Hussein – traumatized the Iranian people and helped the Islamic regime’s consolidation of power. In 1997, the election of the reformist president Mohammad Khatami signalled a desire for an open society. But hard-liners undermined even modest attempts at reform.

And then there were the events of a year ago.

Iran has ample energy resources and is situated at a crucial geopolitical juncture. When the probable revolution succeeds, a high probability, a democratic Iran will become a powerful player that will fundamentally transform the dynamics of the entire region. No longer will Iran’s neighbours and the rest of the world be fixated on the nuclear issue. Hamas and Hezbollah will evaporate.

June 2009 will go down in history as a dress rehearsal that went wrong.

Source: No Returning to Iran’s Totalitarian Past, by Payam Akhavan, professor of international law at McGill University, co-founder of the Iran Human Rights Documentation Centre. The article appeared in The Globe and Mail on June 11.