"Improbable American"

This is the most inspiring thing I have seen since reading Paul Farmer's Mountains Beyond Mountains about PIH's - Partners in Health - health work in Haiti. (Oh, and since Greg Mortensen and Three Cups of Tea.)

The NYTimes video about a musician, Tom Shays (spelling? sorry) (no college degree, no background in this line of work) who after 9/11 volunteered to do disaster relief work, and ended up in Kashmir after the 2005 earthquake that killed 80,000 people. He decided to stay and started a health clinic that treated 100,000 patients last year.

The video captures his work well and shows how one individual - no matter who he or she is or what his or her background - can impact the lives of others around the world.

He really reminds me exactly of Greg Mortensen, author of Three Cups of Tea, and founder of Central Asia Institute which educates and employs thousands of locals, mostly women, in some of the most remote areas Afghanistan and Pakistan.

He also reminds me of Sarah Chayes.

These are the people that will fix this world and that region.

(If the link above doesn't work, just go here, to the NYTimes video site, and then look for the "Improbable American.")

Rami Khouri on Arab reaction to Iran.

Rami Khoury writes an broad yet important synopsis of reactions in the Arab world to the situation in Iran. Sad, but true.

Jason Jones, will you marry me?

Jason Jones has had some truly spectacularly awesome reports from Iran this week on the Daily Show. Wednesday night's segment, in which he juxtaposed questions posed to Americans with similar ones posed to Iranians was particularly witty, hilarious, telling...and embarrassing if you're an American.

It's a must watch.

Can someone please set up a debate between John "The Iranian situation is all about American values" McCain and this guy???

Excellent interview with Iranian-American Hooman Majd that Andrew Sullivan posted here earlier today. Here is the interview in its entirety on Salon.com. Majd is someone whose advice should be trusted and followed, to name just a few of his credentials: he translated for Khatami and Ahmadinejad, is the grandson of an Ayatollah, and his father was a diplomat for the shah. A friend once told him that he was "...the only person he knew who was both 100 percent American and 100 percent Iranian."

Some amazing quotes from the interview:

But this is an internal matter. For the U.S. to get involved in any way is a huge mistake in my opinion. It makes Iranians very suspicious. One reason they were able to get 3 million people out on the streets from a broad socioeconomic spectrum across all political lines -- you don't get 3 million people on the streets of Tehran if they're all students like in 2003 -- is because the lower class, the middle class, the upper class, students, old people, families, religious families, women in chadors, men in beards, they all came out. These people also voted against Ahmadinejad or felt the vote wasn't fair.

The neocons know nothing about Iran, nothing about the culture of Iran. They have no interest in understanding Iran, in speaking to any Iranian other than Iranian exiles who support the idea of invasions -- I'll call them Iranian Chalabis. It's offensive, even to an Iranian American like me. These are people who would have actually preferred to have Ahmadinejad as president so they could continue to demonize him and were worried, as some wrote in Op-Eds, that Mousavi would be a distraction and would make it easier for Iranians to build a nuclear weapon and now all of a sudden they want to be on his side? Go away.

I'm not saying Obama is the most knowledgeable person on Iran, but he's obviously getting good advice right now. He understands way more about the culture of the Middle East than any of the neocons. For them to be lecturing President Obama is a joke. I have criticized Obama; for instance, I criticized him for having a patronizing tone in his Persian New Year message. But right now I think he's doing a good job. The John McCains of the world, they're Ahmadinejad's useful idiots. They're doing a great job for him.

Don't cry for me Argentina!!

Mark Sanford is a liar and an adulterer, but worst in my book, he is a dirty, dirty hypocrit. He has always been Jimmy Judgy about the sex lives of others, voting to impeach Clinton and against same sex marraige and civil unions. Also he is a filthy hypocrit-weasel for cloaking his blubbering confession words in a veil of religious rhetoric. Shuma Aleik, as they would say here in Morocco, or shame on you.

Souqs in Marrakech.

The souqs, where I will be spending a significant amount of time.

Jm3 al Fna.

Kotubia Mosque, Marrakech.

Kotubia mosque, Marrakech.

Arabic students' group.

I am the group leader for this fine group of Arabic students here in Marrakech.

Best reason to build a lake ever; Berbers are brilliant.

I learned the coolest piece of history today: The pool/lake at the Menara in Marrakech was built in the 11th Century by the first Berber dynasty, the Merabats, to learn how to swim in preparation for their voyage over Andalus to assist Muslim popualtion here. Definitely the best reason to build a lake I have ever heard.

Me in Marrakech.

Hired hands for the Iranian regime...

Andrew Sullivan just reported here that The Guardian has this firsthand account that the men carrying out these massacres are hired hands, paid by the Iranian regime to beat protestors to death.

Massacres in Tehran.

Andrew Sullivan, The Guardian, CNN, Huffington Post, and several other news sources are reporting that there were massacres last night and today in Iran. Many reports are about one that occurred at Baharaestan Square during which hundreds of men armed with clubs emerged and beat demonstrators mercilessly. See Andrew Sullivan's post on this here; it includes a recording of a phone call from a woman who called CNN from Iran about the violence. Hundreds are reported to have been beaten and shot (some severely, some fatally) by the Rev Guard and Basij. You can also read the firsthand accounts here at the Guardian blog.

Hospital workers are providing many of the accounts, which the government has tried tirelessly to prevent them from doing, read one here at The Guardian.

Mullahs protesting in Iran.

CNN is reporting that mullahs are joining the protests. An important development.

Obama 1 million; Nico Pitney 1 million; Regular Press 0.

Obama is just too good at this and this.

Fred Barnes needs to go read an Iranian history book, or talk to an Iranian, and then come back and talk about Iran.

This is a great exchange between Fred Barnes (who clearly has NEVER asked an Iranian if they remember 1953 and furthermore understands little about US-Iran dynamics or about successful revolutions and social and politcal movements in the current Middle East/ Iranian context) and a woman with the last name Powers who I think is Samantha but who they list as Kristen. (I found this on Andrew Sullivan's blog.)

(Also note that Henry Kissinger supports Obama's approach to Iran.)

POWERS: I haven't heard that and I have seen many people come out, including Henry Kissinger, saying that he handled this very well, and that, in fact, it would be bad for the United States to get involved in this.
FRED BARNES, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, THE WEEKLY STANDARD: It is not a question of getting involved. We're not going to send troops there or anything like that.
The question was whether we would support the democratic voices and condemn the regime — a tyrannical regime — as Kirsten said, no question about that.
Obama has gotten better, I'll have to say, over the weekend. He got better. His statements are a little stronger, but really not strong enough yet.
And it was clear from the beginning what he was trying to do. I think it was probably clear to Mousavi and the demonstrators and the democratic forces in Iran, too. He tried to protect whatever relationship he has with Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollah Khamenei because he thinks somehow he is going to get some grand bargain that they will back away from nuclear weapons.
They're not going to do that. They're the people who are not going to do it.
Mousavi might be. Mousavi is different on nuclear weapons too. He has said we will have nuclear power, but whether we have nuclear weapons or not, that's negotiable. That's the opposite of what the other regime has said.
He, also, is representing — I'm not sure how pro-American he is, but all of a sudden he represents the forces in Iran that are pro-American.
And then when you see, you know Obama has used — the most pathetic thing is to say, gee, well, we were involved in 1953 — 1953! This is an extremely young society. You think those demonstrators are thinking, well, we hope the U.S. stays out because they were involved in 1953? That's total nonsense.
POWERS: I think there is a history there.
BARNES: 1953?
POWERS: They do remember the United States meddling.
BARNES: No, they don't. [REALLY FRED???]
POWERS: I think the reason Obama didn't get involved I don't think is because of what you just said. I think it is because he truly believed that meddling in it would make them be able to come out and justify the repression...
BAIER: Very quickly, Kirsten, do we hear a different tone from the president at his news conference tomorrow in the Rose Garden?
POWERS: Well, I think we already started to hear a different tone. And I think he feels that he has to at least acknowledge that we do not condone this kind of behavior. But I think at the end of the day he still does not want to be seen as somebody who is propping up this revolt.
BARNES: But there is no way he can prop up demonstrators. All they want is expressions of support.
These democratic revolutions — wait a minute — these democratic revolutions, whether it is in Poland or the Philippines or South Korea or Indonesia or South Africa, they have always wanted international support. And it has always been important. [Did you ever think about the fact that the current (anti American foreign policy) context in the MENA region might counteract this??]
POWERS: But is there any doubt where Obama stands in this? Does anybody doubt that?
BARNES: Yes, there is great doubt. Of course there is doubt.
POWERS: Do you think the people of Iran don't know he stands behind them? Do you think he's on the side of Ahmadinejad?

Ideological, simplistic nonsense from McCain.

McCain: "I don't consider it meddling when you stand on the side of the principles that made our nation the greatest..."

What a bunch of ideological, simplistic nonsense. I'm sorry, but what does this have to do with Iran? How does it address Iranians concerns?

I second that!

“They are an obvious attempt to distract people from what is truly taking place within Iran’s borders,” he said. “This tired strategy of using tensions to scapegoat other countries won’t work anymore in Iran. This is not about the United States and the West. This is about the people of Iran, and the future that they, and only they, will choose.”

(Obama today)

Brzezinski on neocon/ Ahmadinejad parallel

Zigbiniew Brzezinski drew an accurate parallel on Fareed Zakaria's show on CNN; he compared Ahmadinejad and his cronies to U.S. neocons. "And there are those who are supporting the regime, who in many respects are like our neocons -- very similar to our neocons." Both groups thrive on a aggressive hawkish black and white view of the world, where might makes right and bold words and provacative ideological statements define of foreign and domestic policy.

Brzezenski goes on to reveal why these neocons actually want Ahmadinejad in power:
"One of the paradoxes here domestically is that many of the people who call for the most energetic involvement by Obama in the process, they simply would prefer to have an American-Iranian showdown."

Successful revolutions always have a friend at the top.

I think a really, really key point here is that in successful revolutions, protestors, the masses, always have a friend at the top. This friend opens the gates to the governing structure, allowing the protestors to access power from within.

The masses seems to have several friends at the top right now in Iran in Ali Larijani, Rafsanjani and Montazeri. The last two names are powerful members of the Assembly of Experts and are reported to be trying to persuade other members of the Assembly top join their reformist team.

Ex reformist president Khatami is also clearly on the side of the protestors.

Parallel between 1979 and 2009. (Oh and, just for kicks, between Khamenei/ Ahmadinejad and the Republican party in the US.)

I think an interesting parallel exists between the 1979 Revolution and the current situation in Iran.

In 1979, there existed a great distance between the Shah and the Iranian people. By distance, I mean, generally speaking, he was not in touch with the needs of his people. To name just a few, he did not address the needs of the merchants, of the new working class in cities, of the religious parties. (I will elaborate on this more later, I am in a bit of a hurry right now.)

Similarly, today, a great distance exists between Khamenei and the Iranian people, especially those out in the streets. Sure, a bunch of old conservative clerics support him, but they do not represent the people of Iran of today. The represent only a small segment of society. It was so interesting watching a video of Ahmadinejad supporters and the crowd at a Khamenei speech...all religious old Iranian men. (Ok they were a few chicks at Ahmadinejad's rallies.) but little diversity. It kind of reminded me of watching the Republican Party convention last summer.

The Iran of today is diverse, the majority of students are women, just like the majority of protesters are reportedly women; they are currently equal to men in practice but not by law. This is what Iranians are on the streets - their rights - right to have a vote, for women's rights.
(For example, here is the story and words on the revolution of one woman who has a law degree but can't practice.)

Limited democracy can't last forever.

Iran has existed since 1979 as an odd mix of autocracy and democracy, with the Supreme Leader holding ultimate power, but with elections for a president. The democracy was never real though; elections were never open and transparent. Human rights activists and journalists were consistently arrested at random, women were harassed in the streets by morality police, candidates were hand picked by Khamenei, to name just a few violations. Iranians were allowed certain freedoms, just enough to survive; this coupled with a pervasive and much feared Revolutionary Guard and basij, kept many at bay.

But as we see today, when Iranians' rights were challenged and disregarded in such a blatant way, they took to the streets, challenging the regime, the Revolutionary Guard and the Basij.

Roger Cohen stated today in the NYTimes:

Iranians have fought this lonely fight for a long time: to be free, to have a measure of democracy.
Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic revolution, understood that, weaving a little plurality into an authoritarian system. That pluralism has ebbed and flowed since 1979 — mainly the former — but last week it was crushed with blunt brutality. That is why a whole new generation of Iranians, their intelligence insulted, has risen.

Revealing videos about Iranian protests.

This video and this video really shows what is going on in Iran on the streets. The first is from from Andrew Sullivan's page (by far the best coverage of Iran) and the second from BBC. There is no specific incident on the videos, no shooting or blood or gore, but it really captures what has been going on all day everyday; the persistence of Iranian protesters when faced with the Rev Guard or Basij, and sometimes their ability to defeat and push back these military forces.

Ok here is one more.

Republicans care more about politics than Iranians.

I am sorry, but I despise, DESPISE, these idiot neocon politicians and commentators (ie Lindsay Graham and Lieberman and Charles Krauthammer) who don't know the first damn thing about Iran, out there making speeches about how Obama should support 'those in Iran struggling for freedom.' Puhlease.

This makes me very, very angry. Why? Because it shows that these republicans care more about political posturing and defeating Obama in 2012 than Iranians out in the streets protesting.

It just reminds me exactly of the way that hawkish overbearing neocons ignored ALL of the experts' evidence on the risks of invading Iraq. And, just in general, how politicians and commentators like to interject their unevidenced, nonexpert opinions in these debates, like they know as much as peopele who are experts on Iran and FP. It's all so easy in their minds: Iranians in streets fighting for 'freedom' = US must support these freedom lovers. Folks, that's all there is to it! Just like toppling a statue of Saddam was all there was to overcoming decades of oppression in Iraq!

Any and all foreign policy experts and Iran experts, even Iranian human rights activists, are lauding Obama for his tempered response, stating that it is the most useful course to assist Iranians strggling for justice. David Ignatius quotes several here, including Karim Sadjadpour of the Carnegie Endowment: "if we try to insert ourselves into the momentous internal Iranian drama that's unfolding, we may unwittingly undermine those whom we're trying to strengthen." Why not listen to what these experts have to say? (We all know the argument by now: Obama cannot come out in full support of the protesters becauase that would give Ahmadinejad the ability to dismiss the demonstrators as 'pro American' or motivated by the 'Great Satan' or claim there was Western meddling. This only diminshes their credibility and legitimacy.) Did you hear that Joe Lieberman and Lindsay Graham and Charles Krauthammer?? Iranians agree with Obama's position!! But you think they are wrong? Touche.

(Here, George Will and Peggy Noonan denounce these self serving idiots.)

Couple excerpts from above 'experts' link:

"“I think it’s wise for the U.S. government to keep its distance,” said Hadi Ghaemi, a New York-based spokesman for the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran..."

Trita Parsi, founder of the National Iranian American Council, stated: “The framing that Ahmadinejad is presenting is one in which essentially the whole [opposition] is a Western media conspiracy,” he said. “If the administration is saying things or doing things before Moussavi and the opposition figures out what the plan is, then that’s a real problem, because then it seems like it’s between Ahmadinejad and the west and not Ahmadinejad and the opposition. So the administration is doing exactly the right thing. They’re not rushing in and they’re not playing favorites. They might prefer the democratic process to be respected, but that’s different than [supporting a] specific faction.”

“They’re [she is refering to Lieberman] saying ‘Support Moussavi.’ Well, did you talk to Moussavi to learn if this is helpful? A lot of people seem to have the propensity of knowing what the Iranian people want or what specific people want but [don't] contact them. And in past it’s been detrimental” to Iranian opposition figures, Parsi said. If such American politicians have “not learned from that, it’s sad.”

Leverett (ultimate Iran expert) calls out David Frum's mindless dribble.

This video (scroll down past Krauthammer's idiotic comments to the bloggingheads video) is awesome. The ultimate Iran expert, Flynt Leverett (google him if you don't know who he is, and you'll see why he really is the ultimate Iran expert), calls out David Frum for being the ignorant, narrow-minded, self serving, neocon (sans memory) that he is.

(Basically Frum goes on and on about how this revolution is going to 'change the face of the region' and Leverett is all: Oh really David, just like Iraq did?? but he says it in a much more clever way - and he is right on. Worth the watch!!!)

(Selfish self-promotion: I was thinking the same thing about Iraq when Frum was babbling before Leverett said it!)

Women in Iranian protests.

I just have to point out that women are out in the streets in Iran; they have been beaten, shot, killed and arrested by the Revolutionary Guard and the Basij.

These women are the key participants of this revolution - the hearts and minds of the protests.

What is the endgame in Iran?

I am just wondering what the endgame is in Iran. It worries me. Keeping me up at night...though that might be that I am in Morocco and it is summer and I don't have A/C.

Is it a recount? (I'm not sure this would do justice to the magnitude of the protests.)
Ousting Khamenei? (I'm all for this.)
An end to the entire Supreme Leader position and the Assembly of Experts? (I'm for this more.)

Here is Gary Sick on what Moussavi wants.

Justice for Iranians.

Obama's peppering of his speech with the word and theme 'justice' indirectly and effectively encourages and empowers protestors in Iran from afar. For them, this has always been about justice, Obama recognized that.

It is also a clever way to combat Khamenei and Ahmadinejad, as justice is one of the most important, if not the most important, value in Islam.

Loss of legitimacy in Iran.

Fareed Zakaria made some key insightful points in an interview about the revolution - what it means and where it is going:

Key point on Khamenei's loss of legitimacy:

When the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, declared the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a "divine assessment," he was indicating it was divinely sanctioned. But no one bought it. He was forced to accept the need for an inquiry into the election. The Guardian Council, Iran's supreme constitutional body, met with the candidates and promised to investigate and perhaps recount some votes. Khamenei has subsequently hardened his position but that is now irrelevant. Something very important has been laid bare in Iran today --- legitimacy does not flow from divine authority but from popular support.

Another point from Zakaria, that this is probably just the beginning of the end:

One of the first things that strikes me is we are watching the fall of Islamic theocracy.
I don't mean the Iranian regime will fall soon. It may -- I certainly hope it will -- but repressive regimes can stick around for a long time. I mean that this is the end of the ideology that lay at the basis of the Iranian regime. The regime's founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, laid out his special interpretation of political Islam in a series of lectures in 1970. In this interpretation of Shia Islam, Islamic jurists had divinely ordained powers to rule as guardians of the society, supreme arbiters not only on matters of morality but politics as well. When Khomeini established the Islamic Republic of Iran, this idea was at its heart. Last week, that ideology suffered a fatal wound.

Morocco in 36 hours.

What an amazingly annoying few days I have had trying to get me and 12 students to Morocco.

(I am currently in Morocco working as one of the two group leaders of an Arabic immersion program for 19 high school students. They students are studying at the Arabic Language Institute (ALI) of the American Language Center (ALC) in Marrakesh. (The ALC's main prupose is to teach Moroccans English; they teach about 4,000 locals every semester in 13 centers all over the country, pretty incredible.) The program we are on is part of the National Security Language Initiative - Youth (NSLI-Y) of the Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs of State Dept and run by American Councils on International Education and Legacy International.)

After my group spent 12 hours at National Airport, during which time our flight to JFK was delayed for 10 hours in fifteen minute, half hour and hour increments and finally canceled, our travel agent was somehow able to secure us seats on an 8:50pm flight to JFK so we could try to make the 11:00 flight to Casablanca. (We had more than missed the 8:45 flight we were supposed to be on.) We were put, however, into a holding pattern in flight, making us an hour late to JFK. We walked off the plane at 10:50, the Casablanca flight left from the next terminal over at 11. So we ran (literally ran) outside to the next terminal over, up a hill, you know in those places that dont relaly cater to pedestrians. We finally made it to the Royal Air Maroc check in, and they said they were holding the plane for us, then they said they couldn't check us in, we were too late, then they said they could. So in the end, we made it on the plane...unfortunately our bags did not. We finally arrived in Marrakesh Friday evening, making our travel time a whopping 36 hours!! Our bags' travel time, however, was 78 hours; they arrived Sunday at 11am.

So we're here. I have a nice apartment in a great neighborhood, Gueliz, right in the middle of Marrakesh, a short walk from the medina (the old city). I have internet that is a bit shaky, and access to all Arab news channels. Hurray for that.

Reconstruction in Afghanistan.

Interesting article in Wash Post on new approach to reconstruction in Afghanistan.

"Members of his national security team have concluded that the country requires not just more money and personnel for reconstruction but also a fundamental overhaul of the U.S. approach to development. They want to implement broad-based initiatives aimed at improving the lives of as many Afghans as possible, shifting away from an approach employed during the Bush presidency that focused on generating discrete "success stories" and creating long-term economic sustainability through free-market reform."

Analysis of choices facing Khamenei. (And Rafsanjani in Qom....)

Laura Secor has an interesting piece of the choices facing the Khamenei at the New Yorker.

(The first part includes reports of strange unthinkable arrests of respected clerics who were part of the intelligence services and the 79 Revolution)

Robert Baer, ex CIA, says here we need to look out for what Rafsanjani is doing up in Qom...

Debate over US repsonse to Iranian protests.

The debate continues on the US response to the Iranian elections....Andrew Sullivan has posted many excerpts from it on his blog.

I wish I could examine this debate more closely and list arguments more comprehensively here, but due to the ever looming Morocco trip I have to rely on Mr. Sullivan and others for now.

I know all of you are suffering bidun (without, Arabic) my input.

Iran demonstrations analysis.

I am at all day long orientation for the Morocco trip I am leading this summer - so postings continue to be few and far between. I woke up extra early this morning though (difficult) to come down to the lobby and read more Iran news.

I found this analysis by Neil MacFarquhar in the NYTimes interesting.

Similar intimidation tactics have been on display over the past few days with little result, as Iranian state news reports of seven people killed in various cities did not deter another major antigovernment rally on Tuesday. This time, analysts say, the government will have trouble bringing about a swift, sharp end to the demonstrations over the contested presidential election results in the same way it had shut down previous eruptions.

First, there is the sheer size of these demonstrations, with protests that are not limited to students, but cut across generations and economic classes. Second, there is a more pronounced, if still nebulous, leadership centered around the leading opposition candidate, Mir Hussein Moussavi, who has adopted an openly hard-edged attitude toward the government. Third, the current crisis was inspired by common anger over a national election, not the more narrow issues students took to heart.

Play by play of goings on in Iran via Twitter.

Check out all these amazing twitters - literally a play by play of what's going on in Iran. (Here are a few...click link for more....)

security in Jamaran is unbelieveble - hundreds of Baseej guarding Khamenei
confirmed - Tabriz - Baseej headqurters set fire - 'many' dead

Tehran hotels under high security to stop Iranians from contacting foreign press
anyone with camera or laptop is attacked in street

i am seeing tweets about a lot of disturbances, arrests, violence in Shahrak Gharb, any reports?
we hear 1dead in shiraz, livefire used in other cities RT

Very scared, I was talkin to myuncle in shiraz and he was so paranoid.

If you hear the forces talking in arabic..BE CAREFUL..these guys are imported in, they are not affraid of suicide bombing and killing

Police the reason of insecurity; Dead students buried by profs

Basij attacking Shiraz and Mashad universities, Shiraz U's dean resigned

some student killed by the 4a blast in Babol Univ's dorms; surrounded by Basij forces

Militia still attacking people in sidestreets but main roads are peaceful marchers.

Basij Militia attacks a residential complex

To support or not to support, and if to support, how strongly to support, the Iranian protesters.

George Packer, who I adore, has recommended that Obama come out in greater support of Iranian protesters. This support, he argues, easily falls under the administration's foreign policy approach - realism.

"With riot police and armed militiamen beating and, in a few reported cases, killing unarmed demonstrators in the streets of Iran’s cities, for the Obama Administration to continue parsing equivocal phrases serves no purpose other than to make it look feckless. Part of realism is showing that you have a clear grasp of reality—that you know the difference between decency and barbarism when both are on display for the whole world to see. A stronger American stand—taken, as much as possible, in concert with European countries and through multilateral organizations—would do more to improve America’s negotiating position than weaken it. Acknowledging the compelling voices of the desperate young Iranians who, after all, only want their votes counted, would not deep-six the possibility of American-Iranian talks. Ahmadinejad and his partners in the clerical-military establishment will talk to us exactly when and if they think it’s in their interest. Right now, they don’t appear to. And the tens of millions of Iranians who voted for change and are the long-term future of that country will always remember what America said and did when they put their lives on the line for their values."

Packer does address the counterargument; many have urged caution in the aforementioned course, fearing that Khamenei and Ahmadinejad followers could then use the 'Great Satan' platform to taint and demand protests.

But are we still the Great Satan in the eyes of Iranians? Were we ever to most of those out in the streets? Moreoever, does it even matter in this scenario?? They out in the streets chanting "Down with the government" not "Death to America." I think it will difficult to twist their motivations and goals.

Also interesting to watch: Who will the military side with.

When a revolution becomes a revolution.

Michael Totten, reporter extraordinaire who has recently been posting a great deal of the Iranian protests, quoted a brilliant passage on when revolutions become successful revolutions from revolution expert and Polish journalist Ryszard Kapuscinski. (He lived through and analyzed dozens of revolutions.)

The section Totten includes from Shah of Shahs captures the moment that Kapuscinski claims (and rightly so, in my opinion) the shah's forces were doomed, and the revolutionaries had the potential to prevail. It is brilliant. Totten juxtaposes it with a member of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard running from protesters.

From Shah of Shahs: (Especially see bolded section)

Now the most important moment, the moment that will determine the fate of the country, the Shah, and the revolution, is the moment when one policeman walks from his post toward one man on the edge of the crowd, raises his voice, and orders the man to go home. The policeman and the man on the edge of the crowd are ordinary, anonymous people, but their meeting has historic significance.

They are both adults, they have both lived through certain events, they have both their individual experiences.

The policeman’s experience: If I shout at someone and raise my truncheon, he will first go numb with terror and then take to his heels. The experience of the man at the edge of the crowd: At the sight of an approaching policeman I am seized by fear and start running. On the basis of these experiences we can elaborate a scenario: The policeman shouts, the man runs, others take flight, the square empties.

But this time everything turns out differently. The policeman shouts, but the man doesn’t run. He just stands there, looking at the policeman. It’s a cautious look, still tinged with fear, but at the same time tough and insolent. So that’s the way it is! The man on the edge of the crowd is looking insolently at uniformed authority. He doesn’t budge. He glances around and sees and sees the same look on other faces. Like his, their faces are watchful, still a bit fearful, but already firm and unrelenting. Nobody runs though the policeman has gone on shouting; at last he stops. There is a moment of silence.

We don’t know whether the policeman and the man on the edge of the crowd already realize what has happened. ***The man has stopped being afraid – and this is precisely the beginning of the revolution. Here it starts. Until now, whenever these two men approached each other, a third figure instantly intervened between them. That third figure was fear. Fear was the policeman’s ally and the man in the crowd’s foe. Fear interposed its rules and decided everything.

Now the two men find themselves alone, facing each other, and fear has disappeared into thin air. Until now their relationship was charged with emotion, a mixture of aggression, scorn, rage, terror. But now that fear has retreated, this perverse, hateful union has suddnely broken up; something has been extinguished. The two men have now grown mutually indifferent, useless to each other; they can now go their own ways. Accordingly, the policeman turns around and begins to walk heavily back toward his post, while the man on the edge of the crowd stands there looking at his vanishing enemy.

Modern day Manifesto. Iran style.

Andrew Sullivan reports:

This list was being passed around among the resistance in Iran today:
1. Remove Khamenei from supreme leader because he doesn't qualify as a fair supreme leader
2. Remove Ahmadinejad from president because he took it forcefully and unlawfully
3. Put Ayatollah Montazeri as supreme leader until a review group for the ghanooneh asasi ( "constitution" ) is set up
4. Recognize Mousavi as the official president
5. A goverment by Mousavi and start a reform of the constitution
6. Free all political prisoners without any ifs ands or buts, right away
7. Call off any secret organization such as "gasht ershad"

Three cheers for Iranians and Andrew Sullivan.

I can't believe I am taking the time to post this (haven't packed the night before leaving for Morocco for six weeks) but Andrew Sullivan's postings on Iran are just TOO UNBELIEVABLY AMAZINGLY INCREDIBLE to not mention.

There are a ton of videos on his page, here is a video of Iranians screaming Allah Akbar in protest from rooftops in Tehran. (As Michael Totten, one of the most amazing, if not the most amazing, traveling-reporter-bloggers-writers (thanks for the reminder Willy Pell) notes, the mullahs ain't gon' do nothin about that!)

Any one of my students could tell you this, I am totally and absolutely obsessed with how and why revolutions happen when they do. But I always look at them in history - China, Russia, Iran; I feel like I might be living through one right now...and I can't believe I am not there. Boy oh boy I would give anything to be in Iran right now.

I am so in awe of, and inspired by, the Iranian people. We should all do our part, anything we can to stand by them in solidarity and support.

Morocco bound.

I am leaving for Morocco this Thursday morning (leading a group of high school students on an Arab immersion program for six weeks) and will be in all day orientations everyday until then. This means that my ability to attend to my blog will continue to suffer.

There are so many matters I have wanted to write and rant and rave abut for the past few days and week, the Iran elections and the Cairo speech to name just two, and just have not had the time with the end of the school year and preparing to leave for Morocco.

I hope once I am settled in Marrakech, I will be able to post more often, writing about my time there in addition to my typical postings about goings on in the broader region.

Please stay tuned!

Difference between Moussavi and Ahmadinejad supporters.

I love this. What a creative (idiotic) criticism from one of one of Ahmadinejad's advisors on Moussavi's tech savvy supporters:

Shamaqdari portrayed Mousavi's supporters as geeks who spend too much time at their computers.

"Even though it is bad for their mental health, Mousavi's supporters spend hours on the Internet," he said. "Our youths are more social. They like to hang out at baseej centers, on the streets or play sports. They like to meet in groups. Mousavi's supporters are more solitary."

Hypocrisy.

I am just wondering why people like this are not arrested, and people like this are?

This hypocrisy is utterly shocking to me. These two articles (that I link to above) were run in the Wash Post yesterday. One is about the Holocaust shooter, a man with a history of violent acts against government buildings and officials, one being the Federal Reserve, and of violent threats toward Jews and African Americans on his websites. But nothing was done.

The second is about Syed Haris Ahmed, a Pakistani American who was arrested as a potential 'terrorist' for taking pictures of National Monuments and other loose potential possible (who knows if they are valid) connections to some extremist groups abroad.

I am not saying that Ahmed should not have been arrested. What I am saying is that if he was arrested as a terrorist before even acting, or even getting close to acting, how was James von Brunn who had actually already committed violent acts and avowedly hated some groups of Americans - Jews and African Americans - walking the streets, considered a radical white supremacist??

How screwed up are our labels and our preconditions for these labels. I know there are differences between these cases. But it seems some have come to define 'terrorism' as something that only Arabs and Muslims and foreigners do, not Americans. A Pakistan American plans violence, he's a terrorist; a Caucasian American does the same, he's a radical white supremacist.

To be honest I think the terrorist label is totally inept and ineffective and inappropriate because it fails to to bring out political, social, and economic nuances of violent extremist groups. If we do not understand them we will never be able to combat them. We seem to bring out the nuances of von Brunn just fine in all the articles about him - his motivations his goals; why do we fail to try to understand the myriad motivations and goals of foreign groups?

It was only a matter of time. Go Pakistan!

Sources are reporting that Pakistani are giving the Taliban the cold shoulder. And my cold shoulder I mean a 'get the f out of our country.'

Dawn reports this here.

BBC here.

I am sorry, but this is what the US needs to let happen in other places, have indigenous populations fight their own battles. There is no one that dislikes oppression less than those who would be the subjects of that oppression. By empowering themselves, populations gain unity of struggle, confidence and legitimacy. Furthermore, they are not tainted by 'foriegn' forces.

I know this seem like a simplistic analysis; it is. I am tired and will elaborate more tomorrow.

Something great going on in Morocco.

This is by far one of the most interesting things I've read about in months.

The Wash Post reported last week on the Murshida, female religious counselors. The Ministry of Religious Affairs in Morocco has been training women to be Murshida so that they can counsel women in need. They do house calls, work out of mosques, hospitals, schools and prisons.

The article reveals that a similar movement is going on in Turkey, where there are hundreds of 'vaizes' or women preachers, and that across the Middle East women are becoming muftis, who are experts in Islamic jurisprudence and can issue fatwas.

Interesting article on Muslim outreach group

"As the Myths Abound, So Does Islamic Outreach." Nice article on a group of Muslims who do diversity training up in Hartford, CT. This work is so important, it's something I am really interested in, educating people to debunk stereotypes on Islam, hence improving relations between the US and the 'Muslim' world. I cannot for the life of me find the article on the Wash Post online. Hopefully you all can, it was in the Style section on Wednesday June 3rd, by Eli Saslow.

More on the 2009 Arab Public Opinion Poll.

I posted on an Arabic Public opinion poll here a couple weeks back. (By Telhami at U Maryland, Zobgy, were presented at Brookings.)

Marc Lynch analyzes their relevance here and here.

Impacts of prison terms on political dissidents.

Interesting article in NYTimes, "Why Dissidents Pick Path of Most Resistance", on how prison terms increase commitment to a cause instead of their intended consequence - to silence. Focuses on several cases in Egypt and Syria.

Warning!! Morocco Trip Approaching.

This is an advance warning to all readers: From 14 June to 26 July, my postings might be rare and skimpy.

This is because I am going to Morocco. I love Morocco; I was in the Peace Corps there a few years ago and have a lot of friends and people I consider family in my village, Ait Attou in the Errachidia province. I have been back twice tow visit since the end of my service.

So anyway, I got a job this summer leading a group of high school students on a 6 week Arabic immersion trip. They will be studying at the Arabic Language Institute (ALI) of the American Language Center (ALC) in Marrakech. The program is part of the State Dept's National Security Language Initiative for Youth.

IN cause you all are wondering about my plans after that: I will return to the States to DC for the month of August and then am off to Iraq, to work at the American University of Iraq at Suleimaniya, the first week of September!! Wooohooo!

Friday night steak dinner.

Yep, it's that time again: time to post another picture of my traditional friday night ribeye dinner. This time, I have before and after shots. Enjoy.

Tonight, I will not be having my traditional friday night steak dinner. Instead I will be feasting on lobster. Once again, the OEG's (Old Ebbitt Grill) lobster special month has rolled around. It happens twice a year, in June and October. My mom and I go once to twice a week.

Obama and Islamists

From Wonk Room at Think Progress: Will Islamists be Part of the President's New Dialogue?

On the Awakening in Iraq

Carnegie's Arab Reform Bulletin came out with a report on Iraq, "The Status and Future of the Awakening Movements".

POMED report on Democracy in Egypt.

New report from POMED (Project on Middle East Democracy) entitled, "Looking Forward: An Integrated Strategy for Supporting Democracy and Human Rights in Egypt." Download it here.

New book on reformers in the Middle East.

Michael Gerson mentions a great new book that focuses on seven reformers in the Middle East in his oped on Ayman Nour, The Next Founders: Voices of Democracy in the Middle East.

EGYPT.

Wow, I picked a bad few days to go out of town. There are so many darn articles on Obama's speech in Egypt and on democracy in Egypt I can barely think straight.

First and foremost, here is the transcript of the speech. There are many many things I liked about the speech, but in the interest of time, I will recount them at a later time after I have caught up very briefly on all the great articles written while I was gone.

Marc Lynch's initial analysis of the speech.

The speech led to a flurry of articles on why Obama should NOT give up on democracy promotion in the Arab world, especially in Egypt. For those who were angry he chose Egypt because of its lack of democracy, this flurry might give them reason to pause because it seems to have brought democracy back on the agenda, if it was ever gone.

There has been a debate raging on whether democracy promotion should be part of foreign policy. And, if in fact it should, how to do it - direct funding of democracy groups, or through more indirect paths such as economic development. Egyptian activists and citizens seem to think it should be a huge part of our foreign policy - Ayman Nour and Saad Eddin Ibrahim to name just two of the most active and well known political opposition leaders.

Important to note:
- The US government recently stopped funding civil society organizations that the Egyptian government does not recognize (bad)
- The US government (Gates) publicly stated that there will be no 'conditionality' clause on defense aid to Egypt (bad)
- The Bush admin., after advocating major democratic reform in Egypt, abandoned democracy promotion after Islamist parties (many were Islamic democratic parties, but that didn't matter to them...) won an overwhelming number of seats in parliament in 2005

Obama In Egypt: A Vision for Democracy Promotion , in World Politics Review by Brian Katulis and Michael Cohen.

Don't Give Up on Egypt, in Foreign Policy by POMED (Project on Middle East Democracy) peoples.

Michael Gerson on Ayman Nour in the Wash Post. (Ayman Nour is a leading political opposition figure in Egypt, he ran for President in 2005.)

Realism May Not Play in Cairo from NYTimes Week in Review section.

Variety of opinions from bloggers and activists in the region from the NYTimes oped page.

Ditching Democracy in Egypt? from MESH (Middle East Strategy at Harvard) by Scott Carpenter. (I learned via Marc Lynch that Carpenter is responding to this article by in Newsweek by Steven Cook article on why fiunding democracy programs in Egypt is not effective.)

I would love to read and write on this for days, maybe I will at some point, but for now I am going to move on to list a few other important developments and articles from the past few days.