Iran

AOG, Madrid

Iran is on a knife-edge, with millions of voters taking to the streets in outrage as evidence mounts that the government may have massively rigged and stolen last Thursday's election.

The Islamic regime has cracked down brutally on the protesters and is imposing a blackout on Iranian society - shutting down domestic and international media, the internet and even text-messaging. For many, it the best thing that could have happened to Twitter.

The voice of Iranians may have been silenced at the polling booth, now the regime is attempting to silence them everywhere else.

Facing beatings and gunfire, the opposition, according to Western media, is organising mass demonstrations and a general strike.


This election is of international importance. Iran is a major regional power, and the international community is seeking diplomatic engagement that holds a key to peace in the Middle East.

The conservative Guardian Council, headed by a key Ahmadinejad ally, is reviewing the vote over the next 9 days.

According to some Western media, “There is a real possibility that democracy will prevail.”

However, just because a regime allows for elections, a voting booth, and an electoral list, this does not mean it is a democracy, nor that the elections are free.

Ultimate power in Iran lies with Ayatollah Khamenei, who may have backed the rigging - but he is hired and fired by the Assembly of Experts, chaired by ex-President Rafsanjani who has condemned vote-fixing.

If Rafsanjani and allies can get enough votes on the Assembly this week, they can press to re-open the results, even to remove Khamenei from power.

But will any of this happen?

The Islamic Revolution came into power back in the 1970s in a similar way, and the religious right took over the country.

Is the West not expecting too much in hoping that a recount, if it goes ahead, will show a true vote count?

Are we to think that the regime will welcome change peacefully?

Of course, it could also turn out that Ahmadineyad won the election fair and square.

But the current state of affairs in the country certainly points to a feeling of insatisfaction within the Iranian population.



Even if the election was not rigged, there is obviously a certain malaise in the country which the ruling oligarchy would do well to address. Sooner rather than later.

Here are some international sources:

1. The Guardian: "Iran's regime cracks down on opposition and media", 16 June 2009


2. Al-Jazeera: "Supreme Leader Under Pressure", 15 June 2009


3. "Evidence that the Iranian Presidential Election Was Stolen", Juan Cole, 13 June 2009


4. More detailed analysis by a polling expert of "fishy numbers" in the results announced by the interior ministry.


5. One of many active live-blogs.


6. #IranElections - live, unfiltered updates via Twitter from Iran and around the world

Palin's looks

AOG, Madrid

Presence. As much an asset to have as it is a liability to lack it; in theater and film as it is in politics.

In the Republican convention it is plainly obvious, after Sarah Palin’s performance yesterday, that it is she, and not McCain who has it. Palin has a great presence. Strong. Confident. Savvy.

Her image has all the things Hillary Clinton lacked, she instils in you the strength of her personality only by standing there, doing nothing.

It might be her beauty queen background or perhaps she was wearing power heels, but when compared to an enfeebled McCain who had to hold the microphone with both hands one can’t help but think “yes, there stands the next President of the United States, and she looks great”.

Is John McCain sick? He certainly looked frail just before introducing Palin.

This is not an image which instils security in the electorate.

Perhaps this election, more so than any other ever before, when thinking of the Republican candidate, one has to consider the very real possibility that said candidate might die in office, and it will be his VP who takes charge of the Executive branch of Government.

As she stood there, next to McCain, Sarah Palin certainly looked like the next president, as much as does Barack Obama.

This is not to say that she can actually pull it off, though when placed on the spot she might surprise us all.

However, for starters, she certainly looks like America’s first Madam President. The British press is already calling her "America's Margaret Thatcher". I hope for America's sake that they are wrong in this respect. She looks nothing like her.

Looks, however, can always be deceiving.

The "Presidentiables"

AOG, London

I am saddened by the current state of affairs within the Democratic party and the upcoming presidential election in the US.
A couple of weeks ago I was semi-content with the idea that the next president of the US could have been a woman-Mrs. Clinton, or Mr. Obama. Yet, as the pre-presidential pageant runs, a few bits and pieces have begun to surface that make me think that, unfortunately, the next president of the US will be a Republican, if not, in fact, Senator MaCain.

I remember life in the US back in 1988, and the presidential election that year. The Democratic party, boldly endorsed the nomination of a certain, unheard of, Mr. Michael Dukakis. For a while, I believed he could be electable, though I remember thinking at the time that I preferred Reagan. I even remember a bumpersticker that read: "Let Dukakis become President, lets make Reagan King!" Ha ha ha... but I do think it represented the popular feeling at the time. Mr. Reagan had been a good president. At least I thought so at the time. So did many others.

I also remember that the media were very much against Mr. Bush Sr. at the time. I remember the quips about Bush Sr being boring, about not having served much in war, about being weak and a bit of a coward.

All looked good for Mr. Dukakis.

And then I saw it. I saw the one thing which made me understand immediatly that Mr. Dukakis would not win. There was a skit on Saturday Night Live on NBC, which parodied the presidential election. To this day I remember its slogan "Vote for Bush, he is more white!"

And then I knew it. Somebody somewhere had stumbled upon the one thing which would turn the election in favor of the weak, cowardly, tiger tatoo on his buttcheek Mr. Bush: his whiteness, or rather, his "more whiteness".

Sure enough, as my family flew out of the US on election day 1988 headed for a new life in Europe, voters in the US elected Mr. Bush.

I think this week it happened again. Whilst both camps intermittently boo and cheer their candidates, someone somewhere has stumbled upon the one thing which will turn the election away from Mr. Obama: his religion. As ridiculous as this may sound to most people, the mud has been flung about Mr. Obama being a Muslim -the bit about his middle name being Hussein has also taken its toll, but, it being just a name, and the infamous Saddam being dead, it is a bit of a "so?" issue- and it has begun to stick.

Fox news constantly decries that he has attended a muslim school in Indonesia, that he has tried to hide his past. That...well, lets face, that Mr. Obama "...just ain't a Christian!" And guess what? I don't think the US is about to elect a non-Christian into the White House. Mr. Obama has already decided not to favor Fox news any further during his campaign. Although this says a lot about the current state of affairs in America's partisan media, it also shows Mr. Obama may have noticed that Fox has struck upon something which may hurt his campaign no end.






As for Mrs. Clinton, the current climate looks less rosy with each passing day. The latest pecadillo by the "presidentiables" (Spanish word neologised into english to mean "those who are eligible of being elected to president") is the running spat between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama. is this a good thing? It is if you are a Republican.

So far, the only thing the Democrats have against them is that their candidates are seen as a) a woman, and b) a Muslim. So far, the only electable candidates the Democrats have are a) a woman and b) a Christian who used to be a Muslim.

Are these things important? Well, in any other country on earth, probably not. But in the USA, perhaps both these things are seen as much too important. If you take a look at the american press, it soon becomes obvious that no one is talking about major issues yet, and most everyone is talking about how each candidate is running their campaign- not what their campaign is about.

Is this democratic? Oh, of course it is. Democracy is the rule of the people. And if the people elect politicians on looks, religion, gender and...what else is there? I forget...

US Election candidates 2008

AOG, Madrid

Here are some of the declared (and potential) presidential candidates for the Republican and Democratic Party nominations for the 2008 US Presidential election.

DEMOCRATS:

Announced candidates:

Joseph Biden- U.S. senator from Delaware and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Chris Dodd- U.S. senator from Connecticut.

John Edwards- former U.S. senator from North Carolina and the vice presidential nominee in 2004.

Mike Gravel- former U.S. senator from Alaska

Dennis Kucinich- U.S. representative from Ohio and 2004 presidential candidate.

Barack Obama- U.S. senator from Illinois.

Tom Vilsack- former Iowa governor.

Formed exploratory committee:

Hillary Rodham Clinton- U.S. senator from New York and former first lady.

Bill Richardson- New Mexico governor.

Expected or possible candidate:

Wesley Clark, retired U.S. Army general and 2004 presidential candidate.

REPUBLICANS:

Announced candidates:

Sam Brownback- U.S. senator from Kansas.

Duncan Hunter- U.S. representative from California.

Formed exploratory committee:

James Gilmore- former Virginia governor.

Rudolph Giuliani- former New York mayor.

Mike Huckabee- former Arkansas governor.

John McCain- U.S. senator from Arizona and 2000 presidential candidate.

Mitt Romney- former Massachusetts governor.

Tom Tancredo- U.S. representative from Colorado.

Tommy Thompson- former Wisconsin governor.

Other expected or possible candidates:

Newt Gingrich- former U.S. House of Representatives speaker.

Chuck Hagel- U.S. senator from Nebraska.