Today marks the fifth day of widespread public protests in Iran against the theocratic regime. We have seen dramatic footage of women refusing to don hijabs that have been mandatory in public since 1979. At least 12 people killed in clashes with police. There are mixed reports of police units refusing orders to quell protesters. Certainly one of the most important stories of early 2018.

https://twitter.com/femeninna/status/947838040877215751

https://twitter.com/KamVTV/status/947539441878368256

https://twitter.com/ArminNavabi/status/ ... 1631466498

Your middle twitter link shows a protest march in Bahrain in 2011, as many point out, so not wholly applicable to the present situation in Iran. But that's twitter for you.

I wonder, from several thousand miles away, who, if any, of the many who aren't in favour of the Iranian leadership are stoking the fires here, and from previous misadventures in the area, will the final outcome be different from what was originally desired because of other agendas. Or are people now just so pissed off with the leadership they are making their feelings known on a large scale.

Problems may arise because of international issues. Russia (probably - who knows what Putin wants in the area?) won't want Iran destabilized because they are on the same side in the Syrian Civil war, vs Saudi backed others and we all know the tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia. And part of the protests, apparently, are about spending money on foreign wars (and putting Saudi Arabia's nose out of joint) instead of at home.

The real tragedy in all this would be if the protests led to a change in leadership that was even worse, because of the particular local or strategic interests of outside agencies. I'm sure that the Iranians would be looking more towards a secular democracy, as before the 1979 revolution, but would they be allowed to go there or would the world these days have other ideas?


"Saudi Arabia has funnelled large amounts of money in the last 18 months to militant groups and madrassas or religious seminaries in the Pakistani province of Balochistan that borders on the Iranian region of Sistan and Baluchistan, both populated by restive Baloch populations. A Riyadh-based think tank believed to be supported by Prince Mohammed last year published a blueprint for stirring unrest among the Iranian Baluch."

“Washington would be wise to acknowledge the limits of its power inside Iran. Policymakers and pundits cannot change this simple truth: The problems are Iranian, the protestors are Iranian, and the solution will be Iranian,”

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ir ... 6c803c784d

It's funny how the USA, Israel and some of the Gulf states are already clamouring for a "regime change" in Iran.

This will surely help the Iranian government to be more open.... and the hardliners can say the protests are fuelled and controlled by foreign forces.

Counterproductive to say the least.


David

First there was A PLAN : https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.831853

?

Well the Arab spring was a smashing success... what could go wrong?

flyingturtle wrote:

It's funny how the USA, Israel and some of the Gulf states are already clamouring for a "regime change" in Iran.

This will surely help the Iranian government to be more open.... and the hardliners can say the protests are fuelled and controlled by foreign forces.

Counterproductive to say the least.


David

The US under Trump can only see a few centimeters in front. They've never thought things through.

A calculated strategy would be to remain silent; that way the government does not have ammo to say that the protests are foreign fueled. But when has strategy been a strong suit of the Trump Administration?

einsteinboricua wrote:

flyingturtle wrote:

It's funny how the USA, Israel and some of the Gulf states are already clamouring for a "regime change" in Iran.

This will surely help the Iranian government to be more open.... and the hardliners can say the protests are fuelled and controlled by foreign forces.

Counterproductive to say the least.


David

The US under Trump can only see a few centimeters in front. They've never thought things through.

A calculated strategy would be to remain silent; that way the government does not have ammo to say that the protests are foreign fueled. But when has strategy been a strong suit of the Trump Administration?

It isn't just Trump. Unfortunately, the US has this myopia that EVERY internal issue in another country is somehow a reflection on the US. In Cuba and US politicians can't seem to remain silent when they should, Dissidents practically have to beg idiot US politicians from putting them on a pedestal lest the Cuban regime leverage that to show how they are US puppets. Same in Iran. When will US politicians learn?

Interesting, Iran is kind of inherent unstable. Lots of people below 25, born after the revolution and are less strict than their parents. They want to open up to the world. So I can see that something needs to change and is going to change in the next ten years and perhaps this might be the beginning. (I do not believe that Iran will turn into an enlighted liberal democracy, but might be moving a bit closer to it)

I dont think the western media reports are quite accurate wrt the nature of the protests. What I have heard from my friends in the Iranian community in India, is that the anti-cleric protests are a small fraction of the overall movement happening within Iran.

The biggest protests have been at rallies organised by an upstart called Imam Reasi who is looking to overthrow the current moderate Govt of Rouhani. Reasi wants to throw the nuclear deal out and has a more anti-American position.

CNN reports in particular are not reporting this story truthfully.

einsteinboricua wrote:

The US under Trump can only see a few centimeters in front. They've never thought things through.

A calculated strategy would be to remain silent; that way the government does not have ammo to say that the protests are foreign fueled. But when has strategy been a strong suit of the Trump Administration?

Considering we've tried everything in the region between regime change, staying silent, supporting protesters, lobbing bombs from a safe distance, all with pretty poor results at best, I can't imagine how this will turn out well. And considering this administration has a collective boner for murdering Muslims, as well as doing something *anything* to get revenge on Iran, it is hard to imagine how this ends without more blood on our hands and ugly consequences for generations to come.

a correct assay. Thank you.

but
"staying silent"

really. when did that happen?
maybe in an environment of commercial choking and "waiting for blue" ?

These protests have been very different from past ones and even for a Persian speaking Iranian as I am, its been hard to follow. I will say that although I am vehemently against US foreign policy, the US could play a positive role. The USA sat out the 1999 and 2009 protests (under Democratic presidents and at the urging of many Iranian Americans ) but its different now. For one, we know the protests failed utterly the prior 2 times and accomplished exactly nothing. I don't see why doing the same exact thing a 3rd time would net a better result. Point 2, the US already has a nuclear deal in place so there is no reason to hold back now. They already have what was essential in their eyes. I would offer trade with the US and access to Boeings (Trump is purposely delaying the licenses in violation of the nuclear deal) in exchange for regime reform. These protests are more economic in nature and the US is still the largest country in the world that doesn't trade regularly with Iran and doesn't have any diplomatic relations at all.

The problem with Trump is that he's exactly the wrong person at exactly the right time. After idiotically calling the Persian Gulf the "Arabian Gulf" on TV, giving away Jerusalem to Israel AND banning Iranian Visas to the USA, he's become one of the most despised people in recent Iranian history. There's no walking back from that.

solarflyer22 wrote:

The problem with Trump is that he's exactly the wrong person at exactly the right time. After idiotically calling the Persian Gulf the "Arabian Gulf" on TV, giving away Jerusalem to Israel AND banning Iranian Visas to the USA, he's become one of the most despised people in recent Iranian history. There's no walking back from that.

I fully agree. Trump does not do any constructive work.

If Trump boasts himself as the great dealmaker, why doesn't he strike a friggin'... DEAL, instead of holding up travel and commerce?


David

flyingturtle wrote:

If Trump boasts himself as the great dealmaker, why doesn't he strike a friggin'... DEAL, instead of holding up travel and commerce?


David

I've been thinking about this and I think it is because much of his dealing is with either banks, other real estate entities when the Trump name was big, or contactors who were little fish. He was able to sqeeze them by playing hardball.

His mindset is that you deal with Iran or the Palestinians they way you deal with so-and-so construction company. His attitude is that so-and-so construction company needs Trump more than he needs them.

Problem is that these countries have their own constituents, their own press yapping at their leaders heals. Int'l relations doesn't work like that.