Categories
Books & printed materials Conflict & disaster History & heritage Politics & government

[3005] Reading Revolutionary Iran, or an appreciation for glossary

My readings could be driven by current affairs. That was the reason I picked up Rashid Khalidi’s The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine. And that was the reason I recently read Michael Axworthy’s Revolutionary Iran: the Twelve-Day War between Iran and Israel had just concluded. These books always remind us that there is almost always a long history behind contemporary events. Things very rarely just happened on a day.

Revolutionary Iran, first published in 2013, focuses on the 1979 Iranian Revolution. But it also covers a hundred years’ worth of history, starting from the early 20th century (with the fall of Qajar Iran and the rise of the Pahlavi dynasty) up to the controversial 2011 Iranian presidential election. The long sweep of history is written up all with the aim of setting the revolution in its proper context.

As with any kind of similar books (such as much thicker and expansive The End of Empire and the Making of Malaya), the breadth and depth of the discussion are a challenge to casual readers equipped with only general knowledge of the country: there are just too many names, too many years and too many events to remember and make relevant to the whole exercise. These names and events are all interrelated, making reading Revolutionary Iran complicated. One could get lost along the way. That could cause frustration and eventually DNF: ‘did not finish’. The phone is always ready to dumb us down with social media, ever jealous of any of us perusing long-form materials.

The complexity reminds me just how useful a glossary and an index could be. It kept the story in my head straight while going through the pages of Revolutionary Iran.

Referring the glossary and the index could be a pain. Flipping pages back and forth is disruptive to reading flow. It is almost like reading while consulting a dictionary or an encyclopedia at the same time. It almost feels like reading Wikipedia with all of its hyperlinks could have been a more enjoyable endeavor.

But reading Wikipedia has its own pitfalls. Those hyperlinks are rabbit holes to be explored. With an undisciplined mind, one could easily end up reading about Kurdish nationalism or the history of Azerbaijan all of which may have some relevance to the events of 1979, but does not assist us in understanding the nuances of the Iranian revolution any better. Wikipedia’s hyperlinks could provide context, but an overload of information could also drown out of the context. Some who wander are lost.

So, a book, unlike Wikipedia, is a guided tour. It keeps the fluff out by focusing and contextualising the essentials. It is the model-building tool. And the glossary and the index, often forgotten, are little manuals useful if the reader needs help along the way.

Categories
Conflict & disaster Politics & government

[2193] Of choosing between Iran and the US

The Nuclear Security Summit in Washington D.C. suggests that Malaysia is siding with the United States with respect to the issue of Iran and nuclear proliferation. Apparently, even before the meeting between Prime Minister Najib Razak and President Barack Obama, Petronas, the state petroleum enterprise of Malaysia, has ceased shipping of gasoline to Iran in early March, anticipating an international, or at least a US-led trade sanction on Iran.[1] I say apparent because the Prime Minister claims the report is incorrect, stating it is only a spot sale instead of a stop of some long term contract.[1a] I am unsure what is the truth at the moment.

Notwithstanding the accuracy of the report, I seriously doubt the effectiveness of economic sanctions. I am not a fan of wide-ranging sanction and it is easy for me to rationalize this position.

I am also not a fan of the Iranian government for far too many reasons but if the proposed sanction is as wide ranging as I think it will be — adding gasoline into the list is a big thing — it is likely to hurt ordinary Iranians in Iran more than hurting Ahmadinejad government.

While the possible hardship may provoke popular Iranian sentiment against the Iranian government, such tactic appears too pragmatic — too realpolitik? — for my liking. Furthermore, the large protest immediately after the election in Iran demonstrates how hard it is for such sentiment to prevail.

This thinking of mine is a product of observing both Myanmar and North Korea. What exactly has trade sanction achieved there? Both regimes are still in power. In fact, their policies have hardly changed.

Sanctioning Iran may potentially further isolate Iran like how Myanmar and North Korea have been isolated without any real success in achieving the expressed goal of the sanction.

This has not even considered the fact that for the sanction to work — work in the sense that Iran will not be able to get its supplies from alternative source — the whole world must work together. A sanction by only the US and its allies will benefit others who refuse to participate, at the expense of countries like Malaysia. China for instance is dragging its feet in joining such sanction. If it refuses, the US-led sanction will be worthless.[3]

Despite this, I do appreciate Malaysia’s position and the reality on the ground. Malaysia has a lot more to gain by cooperating with the US than with Iran. Total trade between Malaysia and the US far exceeds that between Malaysia and Iran. Thus, I personally rather have Malaysia be diplomatically closer to the US than with Iran. I for one support better relationship with the US although, I can agree with Tunku Aziz that it should not be done “at any cost”.[4]

Still, ideally, I would prefer to have Malaysia to work with both the US and Iran. To have to choose between the two is an unfortunate choice to have.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — Petronas, the Malaysian state oil company, said on Thursday it had stopped selling petrol to Iran. The move follows growing pressure from the US to shut off Tehran’s access to refined oil products.

The company, which is a long-term supplier of Iran, said it had not shipped petrol to Iranian ports since the middle of March. Petronas refused to give any further details on its decision to put an end to sales. [Petronas halts petrol sale to Iran. Kevin Brown. Financial Times. April 15 2010]

[1a] — NEW YORK, April 17 — Foreign news reports quoting Datuk Seri Najib Razak as saying that Malaysia had cut off gasoline supplies to Iran are incorrect, the prime minister said.

The prime minister said Petronas was involved in a spot sale to Iran in mid-March under a third party deal but since then there had been no requests. [Report On Gasoline Cut To Iran Incorrect, Says Najib. Tham Choy Lin. Bernama. April 17 2010]

[2] — Petronas gave no reason for the pullout but an industry source in Dubai said the company wanted to safeguard its business exposure in the United States.

On Monday, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib and US President Barack Obama agreed on the importance of Iran strictly abiding by its obligation under international nuclear non-proliferation pacts. [Petronas halts fuel sales to Iran as sanctions loom. Reuters via The Malaysian Insider. April 15 2010]

[3] — Companies around the globe have been reducing ties with Iran ahead of possible new U.N. sanctions against Tehran’s controversial nuclear program. But a Chinese-owned company is taking a different approach on trade with Iran.

Traders from Singapore say China’s Sinopec oil company is sending more than 200,000 barrels of gasoline to Iran. The move comes as more and more Western nations have cut or reduced business with the Islamic Republic fearing international sanctions. [Chinese Companies Pursue ‘Talk Now, Invest Later’ With Iran. Carla Babb. Voice of America. April 16 2010]

[4] — [The cost of Malaysia-US relations. Tunku Abdul Aziz Ibrahim. The Malaysian Insider. April 17 2010]

Categories
Conflict & disaster Liberty

[2015] Of is the Iranian army the best hope to stop the bloodshed?

It is hard to describe how I feel about the situation in Iran as protesters clash with the basij — a paramilitary group loyal to the incumbent government — and the Revolutionary Guard.[0][1][2] It is not a matter of ambivalence about the brutality of those security force though I am still quiet unsure whether fraud did occur. The issue has gone well beyond the question of fraud to the question of freedom. And when individuals actually die for freedom, my opinion solidified against the government led by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

What I find it hard to describe is the kind of anger I am in, especially after watching a video of a young woman died after being shot.[3] Something simply has to be done.

Amid the chaos, it is important to take note that the ones suppressing the protesters are the basij and the Revolutionary Guard. In contrast, there are limited reports on the roles of police and the army in suppressing protesters. Some reports further suggest that the police and the army are reluctant in moving against the protesters. As Blake Hounsell writes at Foreign Policy Passport, if “we start seeing cracks in those forces, or the regular army, then the regime will really be in trouble. But it will take sustained pressure — more demonstrations, strikes, and smart politics — to get there.”[4] This of course not to suggest that the army is of one mind just as the Revolutionary Guard is not.[5]

Is intervention by the army — presumably based out of conscience as probably evident through the kind of reluctance reported — the only way out of the quagmire Iran is in at the moment?

It is unclear if the protestors could bring down the incumbent government but with the army in, it will surely makes the possibility of a new government brighter. The problem is, of course, if having a military government desirable?

At the moment, it is hard to say no, especially if the army acts on conscience. What guarantees that that military government will not turn on the very same Iranians who are exercising their rights to assembly and freedom of expression now is another question. The burning question is, will a military government be better than the current one, no matter how far short it is from the ideal of a liberal democratic state?

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[0] — Thirty years ago, during the demonstrations that led to the Shah’s downfall, one of the dominant images was scenes of uniformed soldiers firing live ammunition at protesters. This week, Iran’s clerics seem determined, at least, not to repeat that historic mistake. They remember that the daily news coverage of the Shah’s soldiers shooting and killing unarmed protesters precipitated the collapse of the regime.

Instead, bearded plainclothes militiamen have been attacking and harassing the demonstrators in Tehran this past week. These are Basijis, members of a civilian paramilitary organization founded by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1979. It was conceived of as a civilian auxiliary force subordinate to the Revolutionary Guards, and so it has functioned over the past three decades. During the eight-year Iran-Iraq war, fervent Basijis volunteered to serve on the front lines. For a time, very young Basijis were encouraged to offer themselves for martyrdom by clearing minefields with their bodies in what became known as ”human waves”—literally walking to their deaths en masse so that more experienced soldiers could advance against the enemy. An Iranian friend of mine who is a war veteran described the Basiji boy martyrs as having played a tragic but significant role in the war, by providing Iran with a ”flesh wall” against Saddam Hussein’s vastly superior Western-supplied military technology. [Understanding the Basij. John Lee Anderson. The New Yorker. June 19 2009]

[1] — REVOLUTIONARY GUARDS: An elite military corps of more than 200,000 members that is independent of the regular armed forces and controlled directly by the supreme leader. The Guards oversee vital interests such as oil and natural gas installations and the nation’s missile arsenal.

BASIJ: A powerful volunteer militia directed by the Revolutionary Guards. Basiji played a high-profile role as “morality” police after the Islamic Revolution and now are often used in crackdowns of dissidents. Some estimates place the membership at 10 million, or about 15 percent of the population. [Key players in Iran’s disputed election. Associated Press via Google News. June 18 2009]

[2] — CAIRO (AP) — They’re the most feared men on the streets of Iran.
The pro-government Basij militia has held back its full fury during this week’s street demonstrations. But witnesses say the force has unleashed its violence in shadowy nighttime raids, attacking suspected opposition sympathizers with axes, daggers, sticks and other crude weapons.

At least once, the militiamen opened fire on a crowd of strone-throwing protesters. State media said seven were killed. [Feared Basij militia could transform Iran showdown. Associated Press via Google News. June 20 2009]

[3] — See Iranian woman killed in protests [Two Videos] at Youtube. Accessed June 21 2009.

[4] — It’s hard to tell who has the upper hand, but it seems like there are still plenty of people willing to beat, maim, even kill their fellow Iranians. That’s bad news for the good guys. Roger Cohen, the New York Times columnist who’s in Tehran, tells of a police commander who pleaded with demonstrators to go home because, “I have children, I have a wife, I don’t want to beat people.” From what I can glean from Twitter and various reporting, the regular police aren’t quite as eager to beat heads, in contrast with the hard-line Revolutionary Guard and basij militiamen. If we start seeing cracks in those forces, or the regular army, then the regime will really be in trouble. But it will take sustained pressure — more demonstrations, strikes, and smart politics — to get there. [War on the streets of Tehran. Foreign Policy Passport. June 20 2009]

[5] — According to Cyrus News Agency (CNA) in Iran, at least 16 members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard were arrested on Tuesday for allegedly attempting to join the “people’s movement.” Protests, riots and violence broke out in several cities in Iran on Saturday night following an election which many in Iran and the world say was fraudulent. [Report: Members of Iranian Revolutionary Guard arrested for joining ‘people’s movement’. Wikinews. June 20 2009]

Categories
Liberty

[2011] Of Iranians fighting back

If this turns out to be a revolution, it will be a righteous revolution.

Watch the end of the video; the crowd actually helped a member of the police who collaborated with the regime in power, after all that happened. Would the police be as merciful?

p/s – apparently, cyberwarfare is going on. Ahmadinejad’s website is inaccessible and feeds from Twitter suggest that Iranian websites linked to Ahmadinejad are under attack too. http://www.khamenei.ir/ and www.ahmadinejad.ir are inaccessible at time of posting. http://www.farhang.gov.ir/ might be under attack too. Attacks seem to be DOS in nature.

Categories
Liberty

[2010] Of a message of friendship to protesting Iranians in Malaysia

I am not quite sure what to make out of the elections in Iran. By that, I mean I do not know if there was a fraud or not. There are so many conflicting information on the internet that I must confess, I am confused and unable to decide which side is true as far as the election result is concerned

But let it be no doubt that I prefer Mousavi to Ahmadinejad. Any agent of liberty will find friendship in me. I applaud you for exercising your liberty which should be guaranteed everywhere in the world, including in Malaysia.[1] With you exercising your right to freedom of expression, you inevitably strengthen the struggle of many Malaysians to make this country truly free. And of course, yours too.

But perhaps, you may want to have more Malaysians joining your protests the next time you hold it. Deplorable as it might be, as with any primitive communal thinking, having purely foreigners protesting might give the impetus for xenophobia among conservative Malaysians. By having a local flavor, that opportunity for xenophobia can be vanquished.

Finally, here, to Spring of Tehran.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] —KUALA LUMPUR (AFP) — Malaysian police on Monday fired several rounds of tear gas to break up a noisy protest held by Iranians residing here against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s controversial election victory.

Earlier more than 200 people gathered at the city’s United Nations building to hand over a protest note demanding the world body nullify elections the Iranian opposition allege was rigged.

“We want all the countries in the world not to recognise Ahmadinejad as Iranian president. The election was fraud. The actual winner is (Mir Hossein) Mousavi,” Ali Bozrgmer, a 28-year-old student told AFP. [Malaysia police fire tear gas on Iran election protest. AFP via Google. June 15 2009]