Recently I made reference to the conflicting opinions circulating throughout more progressive media outlets regarding the Iranian election results. While the mainstream was predictably unanimous in its accusations of fraud, independent sources were asking deeper questions, such as ‘What if Ahmadinejad actually won?’
This might all sound a little far-fetched, I know. But then again, far-fetched is what the US military-industrial complex does best. The destabilisation of Iran has been official US policy for at least over two years. It was even reported in the Daily Telegraph in May 2007. According to that paper, President Bush had “given the CIA approval to launch covert ‘black’ operations to achieve regime change in Iran”. Even the US media couldn’t keep the secret. And this is still official US policy in spite of the amiable facade of Obama-ism.
Speaking on Pakistan’s Pashto Radio last week, former Pakistani army general Mirza Aslam Beig claimed that the CIA distributed over $400m throughout Iran before the elections to stir up unrest. It has also been widely reported that the pseudo-leftist Mujahedeen Al Khalq, a terrorist organisation now exiled in Paris, and the Jundallah Sunni terrorist organisation operating the southern Iranian province of Baluchistan, are CIA assets.
Indeed CIA-sponsored covert terrorism has been the source of significant tension between Pakistan and Iran, with the Iranian government often accusing the Pakistanis of not controlling their Sunni extremists. Given their history of black operations installing fascist dictatorships throughout Latin America and other continents since the 1950s, it would be unreasonable to exclude the hidden hand of the American or indeed British secret services in Iran’s turmoil.
So in a sense Ahmadinejad and Khamenei are right to blame the Anglo-American establishment for much of the post-election trouble. But this time Iran’s leaders have turned decidedly Anglophobic, blaming the BBC for disseminating lies and anti-Iranian propaganda.
There is a grain of truth in this. The BBC’s news website published a picture of a rally by Ahmadinejad’s supporters in Tehran, with a caption claiming it was a demonstration by his opponents! This was exposed on the website whatreallyhappened.com and the BBC later apologised for the ‘error’.
It’s not the first time that pictures have been manipulated by the western media for propaganda purposes. When the US and Britain invaded Iraq in 2003, footage was released of a mob dancing around the fallen statue of Saddam Hussein. In reality there was only a few people present, but cleaver manipulation of the camera’s focal length created the impression that there were thousands of jubilant Iraqis present.
The confusion surrounding the Iranian elections is compounded by the support of socialist leaders like Hugo Chavez for Ahmadinejad. However, it is still hard to determine which side of the left/right political divide Iran’s president stands on. Privatisation has been favoured by the Ayatollah Khamenei and is central to the five-year economic development plan proposed in 2005. But many say that the ‘justice shares’ offered to the lowest income families from newly privatised companies are the key to Ahmadinejad’s popularity.
Having said that, a high percentage of both neo-liberal and hard-left Iranian organisations remain vehemently opposed to Ahmadinejad. The Tudah communist party, the Iranian Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist) and the Worker Communist Party of Iran all lambast the Iranian leader on their websites.
What is clear from all of this is that the demonstrations in Iran transcend the election issue. The people have risen up against the clerical oligarchy, not in an effort to open Iran up to the world but to open it up to Iranians.
metrogael.blogspot.com / gaelmetro@yahoo.ie
