I have been bookmarking links since this entire crisis in Iran began, and then deleting them as day after day I leave it until the last moment to write about it. It seemed as though I would never quite get around to doing it. But I have seen some very interesting articles of late, some which are based on events on the ground, and some which are, quite honestly, conspiratorial in nature.
Paul Wells has been providing regular updates on Macleans, and notes that even as an estimated million people have protested against the election results, Iranian police have shot and killed handfuls of people. Reporters have been blocked from covering the massive demonstrations, deported, jailed, or arrested and told not to leave their home.
Today, the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei stpped forward to announce that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s reelection was a victory, and warned protesters against continued public displays. Saying that he would hold them responsible for “bloodshed and chaos” if mass demonstrations went on, it is the closest any leader has come to publicly threatening his own people with murder.
In a speech on Friday, Khamenei said that the unpopular Ahmadinejad won a landslide victory over reformist Mir Hossein Mousavi, saying that the contest wasn’t even close, and therefore could not have been rigged:
“If the difference was 100,000 or 500,000 or 1 million, well, one may say fraud could have happened. But how can one rig 11 million votes?
“Some may imagine that street action will create political leverage against the system and force the authorities to give in to threats. No, this is wrong.”
The Globe and Mail, meanwhile, is reporting that Iran is continuing the process of deporting journalists from Iran, presumably before the bloody crackdown comes. The U.S. House of Representatives voted 405-1 today condemning Iran’s response to the election crisis [in case you're curious, Ron Paul was the sole opposing vote].
But one of the more curious, and admittedly conspiratorial articles floating about, is one by Middle East expert Robert Fisk:
For the photocopy appeared to be a genuine but confidential letter from the Iranian minister of interior, Sadeq Mahsuli, to Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, written on Saturday 13 June, the day after the elections, and giving both Mr Mousavi and his ally, Mehdi Karroubi, big majorities in the final results. In a highly sophisticated society like Iran, forgery is as efficient as anywhere in the West and there are reasons for both distrusting and believing this document. But it divides the final vote between Mr Mousavi and Mr Karroubi in such a way that it would have forced a second run-off vote – scarcely something Mousavi’s camp would have wanted.
Headed “For the Attention of the Supreme Leader” it notes “your concerns for the 10th presidential elections” and “and your orders for Mr Ahmadinejad to be elected president”, and continues “for your information only, I am telling you the actual results”. Mr Mousavi has 19,075,623, Mr Karroubi 13,387,104, and Mr Ahmadinejad a mere 5,698,417.
As Mr.Fisk notes, the letter could be a forgery. If Mr.Mousavi won by such a landslide, is it possible that even the “colourless” Mr.Karroubi could have kept to within such a margin? As well, turning Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s 63% “official” support in the election into picking up just 14% of the vote in the “secret” letter seems difficult to believe.
What the letter really demonstrates, real or, more likely, imagined, is that Iranians have lost the confidence of their leadership, and are caught up in an angry state in which they feel betrayed. And even as they vent against what they perceive as injustice, the government is responding in ways that only fuels those beliefs.
