[home][about][contact] [getting involved] [Educational][Academic] [Media Watch][Views]
When I returned from covering the Iranian elections recently, I was surprised to find my email box filled with progressive authors, academics and bloggers bending themselves into knots about the current crisis in Iran. They cite the long history of U.S. interference in Iran and conclude that the current unrest there must be sponsored or manipulated by the Empire. ››read more
Obama can help this budding seed of hope for civil liberties even more emphatically by altogether cutting the budget "to promote democracy in Iran," evidently channeled through the U.S. Agency for International Development. Ken Dilanian of USA Today reports, "the Obama administration is moving forward with plans to fund groups that support Iranian dissidents."
This financial aid is not only a waste of taxpayer money under these severe economic circumstances, but is in fact the surest way to kill that inborn and grassroots movement. ››read more
Iranians have taken to the streets as the divisions in the ruling class have sharpened into open conflict, writes Peyman Jafari. ››read more
The morning after Iran’s June 12 presidential election, Iranians booted up their computers to find Fars News, the online mouthpiece of the Islamic Republic’s security apparatus, heralding the dawn of a “third revolution.” Many an ordinary Iranian, and many a Western pundit, had already adopted such dramatic language to describe the burgeoning street demonstrations against the declaration by the Ministry of Interior that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the sitting president, had received 64 percent of the vote to 34 percent for his main challenger, Mir Hossein Mousavi. ››read more
Facing an unprecedented popular uprising against his autocratic rule and his apparently fraudulent reelection, Iran’s right-wing president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has attempted to blame the United States. A surprising number of bloggers on the Left have rushed to the defense of the right-wing fundamentalist leader. Citing presidential directives under the Bush administration, they argue that the uprising isn’t as much about a stolen election, the oppression of women, censorship, severe restrictions on political liberties, growing economic inequality, and other grievances, as it is about the result of U.S. interference. ››read more
Hundreds of thousands of Iranian citizens pour into the streets in order to protest against their government! What a wonderful sight! Gideon Levy wrote in Ha’aretz that he envies the Iranians. ››read more
The core issue isn't whether Iran's government is benign or repressive or if its June 12 election was fair or fraudulent. It's that (justifiable criticism aside) no country has a right to meddle in the internal affairs of another unless it commits aggression in violation of international law and the UN Security Council authorizes a response. Washington would never tolerate outside interference nor should it and neither should Iran. ››read more
Like many Iranians, including many Iranians who didn't vote for Ahmadinejad and don't support Ahmadinejad, but whose voices have been largely absent from Western media, even progressive media, Habib is deeply skeptical of opposition claims that the Presidential election on June 12 was "stolen," and has demanded that the opposition provide specific evidence of its claims. ››read more
The National Iranian American Council remains deeply concerned about the deteriorating human rights situation in Iran since the country’s disputed elections on June 12. Disturbing accounts of continued violence and widespread intimidation and harassment of Iranian citizens by the Basij militia and other elements of Iran’s security forces continue to be received from inside the country. ››read more
It is ironic that the European politicians who are exceeding themselves in support of rule of law and respect for human rights in Iran should turn a blind eye to the rogue behavior of the British government that has done everything possible to interfere in Iran's internal affairs, notes Kaveh L. Afrasiabi. ››read more
We continue to believe two things: that vote fraud occurred, and that Ahmadinejad likely would have won without it. Very little direct evidence has emerged to establish vote fraud, but several things seem suspect. ››read more
It is important to be clear that none of the estimates or test results in this
report are proof that substantial fraud affected the 2009 Iranian election. The results suggest
very strongly that there was widespread fraud in which the vote counts for Ahmadinejad
were substantially augmented by artificial means. But it is possible that Ahmadinejad
actually won, supported by many who might have voted for Karroubi or Rezaei instead
voting for Ahmadinejad. The likelihood of such votes being cast needs to be assessed based
on information beyond what can be extracted from the 2005 and 2009 election returns alone.
To support the benign interpretation, the additional evidence needs to explain how the strong
support for Ahmadinejad happens to line up so strongly with the proportion of invalid votes
in the ballot-box vote counts. ››read more
US intervention in Iran would not help the reform movement. But Bush-era neocons are beating the drum for regime change again ››read more
TEHRAN (AFP) – Political deadlock continued in Iran as opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi on Saturday rejected a panel set up to hold a partial recount of votes in the disputed presidential election. ››read more
After 30 years of enmity that closed off most lines of communication, the recent crisis in Iran has suddenly engendered a boom of U.S. interest in the Islamic Republic. But much of the attention in Washington and elsewhere in the U.S. is often misplaced, misguided, or completely detached from the realities currently embroiling Iran in its most significant crisis since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
A few days ago, just as the "color" movement's ferocious struggle to overturn the results of the 10th Iranian presidential elections was fading, it received a new lease of life via the publication of a British study  that casts serious doubt on the official results that saw President Mahmud Ahmadinejad re-elected. ››read more
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claimed a victory that many find difficult to believe: 64% of the vote on a turnout of 84% in Iran's election. The provincial breakdown of the results – obtained by the University of St Andrews and Chatham House from Iran's ministry of interior – show some statistics that are even more surprising. ››read more
Twenty-eight years ago, on June 20, 1981, after almost two years of friction between the Mujahideen Khalq Organization (MKO) - a militant revolutionary group - and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini - the Iranian leader of the 1979 revolution - the dispute escalated into armed conflict. The ayatollah attacked the MKO leaders and followers as non-believers and "monafeq" (hypocrites hidden inside Islamic society). He encouraged people to confront the movement. The MKO was driven underground, but the fierce campaign, which cost the lives of hundreds of the MKO's followers, crushed and rooted the organization out of the country.
Still high from Barack Obama's Cairo speech and Lebanon's recent elections that saw the pro-Western March 14 faction barely maintain its majority in the Chamber of Deputies, the mainstream media fully expected a clean sweep for "reformist" candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi in Iran's June 12th presidential election. They reported surging poll numbers, an ever-growing Green Wave of support for the challenger, while taking every opportunity to get in their tired and juvenile epithets, their final chance to demonize and defame the incumbent Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whom they were convinced had absolutely no chance of winning reelection. ››read more