Time Magazine's 4 Possible Scenarios

Tony Karon wrote a piece for Time that came out on the internet yesterday. You can read it here. The piece offers 4 scenarios. 1) Revolution 2.0, 2) a Tehran Tiananmen, 3) Khamenei's "Divine" Retreat and 4) a "Zimbabwe" option. His conclusion? Not much. He says, "all four options may remain in play while the various camps test one another's strength in the coming days." I disagree. (Why else would I post about it?)

1) First, Karon's assessment of “Revolution 2.0”, is almost completely wrong. But before I talk about how wrong it is, I want to talk about how wrong it is. Does anyone else find it just a little bit crass, just a little bit smug, just a little bit cute to refer to a revolution as a software upgrade? I do. People in Iran are being terrorized, beaten and in many cases killed. And yet those people continue to wake up in the morning, determined to face all those fears yet again in another day of protests. To refer to what's happening as a software upgrade is to minimize what's going on. Furthermore, I suspect that the reason for this cute little label is that Karon doesn't take the protesters all that seriously, and he doesn't want his readers to take the idea of a revolution seriously. He's making light of the idea. If I were an Iranian, I'd be very insulted. This is the kind of smugness on the part of the West that makes the world hate us. This is the kind of arrogance that turns them off. It's almost as if we look down on them as lesser life forms. That needs to end.

But enough ranting about that. Let me attack his actual analysis. He says, "Despite the Twitter-enabled street scenes and revived slogans of Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini's 1979 revolution, a repeat of that successful insurrection remains highly improbable." (Need I mention that his referring to the revolution as "Twitter-enabled" is once again making cute something that's very serious?) At any rate, he doesn't think that another revolution is likely. His first reason is that the leaders of the movement have a lot to lose if the government is brought down, since they're part of the establishment. That's funny. The leaders of the movement aren't in control of the government, and yet they are clearly in control of the people. What exactly is it that they're going to lose? Right now they don't have the reigns of government. If the government is overthrown, who is going to be the new leaders of the new government if not the leaders of the protest movement? They have everything to gain and nothing to lose. Karon's assessment is just strange to me.

Next he says that a popular movement can only succeed if the police/military establishment switches loyalty, and he doesn't see that happening here. Apparently he and I have been getting very different information. I've been reading about paramilitary and police forces covering their faces and operating mainly at night; about their identities being broadcast on Twitter and about some being forced to leave town for fear of reprisal at the Huffington Post. Karon apparently thinks only a very small fraction of the military might of Iran has been utilized, and that they've been nice so far...or something like that. I've also been reading reports of senior members of the Revolutionary Guard Corps and others being arrested, ostensibly for having sympathies with the opposition. Iranian soliders are not cold, unfeeling monsters. Many of them probably voted for Mousavi too. It's just a matter of time. Armed men have already been firing on crowds, and have begun to show signs of feeling ashamed of themselves. The military/police force is beginning to show signs of having a conscience.

Karon also seems to be operating under the delusion that since there are many millions of Ahmadinejad supporters, it would be unlikely that the opposition will be able to destroy the government. Yet I've been reading reports that people in Iran who voted for Ahmadinejad are finding sympathy for the protesters, and are disappointing in the government's handling of the situation. Besides, even if there would be some who would stand opposed to the dismantling of the government at the hands of reformers, why aren't they showing up in huge droves for the government rallies like they are for the opposition? If Karon were correct, then the government rallies would not require people to be bused in from who knows where, but people would be flocking to stand up for the government. The fact is, that hasn't happened. The only people who are standing up for the government at this point is the government. Again, I find Karon's assessment just strange. One of us must not be well informed. That's the only conclusion I can come up with for such a huge difference of opinion.

Not only do I find an overthrow of the government possible, but I find it likely. The opposition movement is playing its cards in exactly the same way as they did in the 70’s. And actually, it’s many of the same people leading the new revolution. This day of mourning strategy in particular is what I mean. That will only continue to prolong the protests, and they will grow exponentially. Martyrdom is incredibly important to Shia Muslims.

This was the same strategy they used in the 70’s to overthrow the Shah. He was overthrown when the protests reached a million people. The protests have already doubled that number by some counts. And I also read an Iranian man’s assessment of the situation, that he was certain that the crowds would not stop until the Supreme Leader himself was ousted. If that happens, it will signal, if not the end of the Islamic Republic, at least a fatal blow to it. Anyway, you’ll notice that the initial big protest march was a march from “Revolution square” to “Freedom square”. Obviously symbolic. It’s a new revolution that they seem to be trying to bring about. And the people running the show were involved in the last revolution, so they know what they’re doing. I've posted an ad here, depicting the opposition platform, saying that they want freedom of speech, rights for religious minorities, etc. These are RADICAL for Iran, and would require a revolution to be brought to fruition. It would require a new, secular state. The things asked for on that ad are incompatible with strict Islamic law. Make no mistake: the opposition's goal is nothing less than a new revolution, a Green Revolution. And I think they just might get it. I certainly hope they do.

2) The second scenario, a Tehran Tiananmen, isn’t really possible. The crowds are WAY too big for there to be any permanently effective crackdown. The secret police have opened fire into crowds already, and it has only made the protests stronger. Furthermore, as mentioned above, there are signs that the will of the military/police is cracking. They don’t want to just keep killing people unnecessarily. Tiananmen square was a much smaller protest. It’s relatively easy for a few tanks to trample a couple hundred students (if you'll pardon my cavalier approach), but what do you do when there’s 2 million people flooding the streets of the city? Do you kill them all? No one has the heart to do such a thing. I doubt anyone but the North Koreans would be capable of such monstrous deeds, but I've been wrong before. In some ways, the gov’t of Iran has already been trying to take the Tiananmen approach, but it’s only backfired. And Khamenei's recent speech indicates that more is coming. But so far, violence has only strengthened the protesters. Any further violence, far from crushing the movement, will only make it stronger.

3) As for a Khameini retreat, I’m pretty sure he can’t do that. If he does that, his position will be so weakened that he might as well give up that position altogether. No, he cannot admit that he’s done anything wrong, any more than the Pope can. He’ll lose everything if he does. Admitting election fraud would lead to revolution even more inevitably than is already the case. Not to mention that some of the top clerics have been saying that election fraud is haraam, which means sort of anathema or a mortal sin. I'm not sure, but I'd guess that probably means the death penalty if you’re found guilty. So I guess it’s possible that admitting election fraud by having a new election might mean Khamenei’s life - at least a trial of great significance. So he can either try to maintain his power or lose everything and possibly be executed in a revolution. If I were him, I’d be desperately trying to cling to power, and wouldn’t admit election fraud no matter what. I think it’s quite possible that it’s that serious.

4) Finally, the Zimbabwe option can’t happen here. That has to do with the cycle of mourning. Iranians, because of their regard for martyrs, don’t just mourn for a few days and then call it quits. No, they mourn for a while, and then they mourn again at 30 days and again at 40 days (again, see here). That’s why it’s such a big deal that Mousavi declared a day of mourning (as confirmed by Reza Aslan's recent appearance on MSNBC). By doing that, he guaranteed that the protests would be prolonged for at least another 40 days. Rather than the protests petering out – besides, there’s 40% unemployment in the country – they’ll only continue to gain momentum and support. Mousavi would be the greatest kind of fool to settle for a cabinet position at this point, when it’s so obvious that the reign of Khamenei, the Supreme Leader, is doomed, and with him, likely the Islamic Republic.

If these four scenarios are truly the only reasonable possible ends to this situation, then my vote goes to the new revolution, and I think anyone who is well informed about the situation and understands it would say the same. And more importantly, I think President Obama also sees it that way, which is why he can be content to stay out of it. He knows that he’s going to see the unraveling of the Iranian state on his watch, and he knows that if he just sits back and watches it happen, it’ll happen all by itself. He may be a lot of things, but he’s not a neo-conservative who sees the world as his own personal chessboard. He doesn’t feel the need to be Captain America, forcing democracy and American values (such as greed and narcissism) on other countries.