|
The Iranian presidential Elections 2009 |
Iran's tenth presidential election was held on 12 June 2009. The President of Iran is the highest official elected by direct popular vote, but does not control foreign policy or the armed forces. Candidates have to be vetted by the Guardian Council, a twelve member body consisting of six clerics (selected by Iran's Supreme Leader), and six lawyers (proposed by the head of Iran's judicial system and voted in by the Parliament).
At no time in the history of the Islamic republic has its leadership been so fragmented and divided. To the hard-liners, the years of the presidencies of Khatami and Hashemi-Rafsanjani were aberrations that need to be rectified by removing any semblance of "liberalism" or sociopolitical freedoms from society. Khamenei is relying exceedingly on the security forces while removing his civil advisers -- a process reminiscent of the last years of the shah's rule in Iran; the reformists, on the other hand, keep espousing more and more moderate positions. The 10th presidential election brought this factional conflict to a head.
The 2009 election, featuring a controversial incumbent and -- for the first time ever -- televised debates, became the most democratic elections ever held in the country. When the results failed to reflect the national will, people took to the streets. Whether the elections were fraudulent is immaterial: the fact remains that they did not correspond to the desire of the majority of the urban voters for a meaningful change.
The articles on this page do not necessarily reflect the views of the Publishers of Amandla (AIDC), the Advisory Board of Amandla or the Amandla Editorial Collective.
|
|
by Peyman Jafari, Jul 2009
Iranians have taken to the streets as the divisions in the ruling class have sharpened into open conflict, writes Peyman Jafari.
The fallout from the presidential election on 12 June precipitated the biggest political crisis in Iran since the 1979 revolution. The official results gave the incumbent president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, 63 percent of votes, compared to 34 percent for his main rival, the reformist Mir Hossein Mousavi, who then accused the government of vote-rigging. In the following days hundreds of thousands took to the streets of major cities, defying the riot police and shouting, "Where is my vote?"
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Iran protests need a new direction – general strike now! |
By Simon Hardy Tue, 23/06/2009 - 21:41
Simon Hardy argues that the street demonstrations need a new strategy to win
Over the past two weeks hundreds of thousands of protesters have braved the Iranian state to fight for democratic rights. The bravery of the young people on the streets has reverberated around the world, the violence of the police and Basiji thugs has shocked in equal measure. The protests have a deeper motive than the belief that the results of the presidential elections have been rigged. Whether or not this is true the protesters and millions behind them are protesting against a system which treats Iran’s citizens as children – permanently under the guardianship of an elite of senior clergymen, who chose the Supreme Leader, who vet all parties and candidates for the parliament and the presidency, so that no real opponents of the system can emerge.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
The extraordinary events of "Tehran, June 2009" |
By Kaveh Ehsani, Arang Keshavarzian and Norma Claire Moruzzi
June 28, 2009
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. But the editors of Fars News were referring neither to the protests, as were the people in the streets, nor to the prospect that the unrest might topple the Islamic Republic, as were some of the more wistful commentators. Rather, the editors were labeling the radical realignment of Iranian politics that they wish for. This realignment would complete the removal of the old guard, as did the “first” revolution of 1978-1979, and consolidate the rule of inflexible hardliners, as did the “second revolution” symbolized by the US Embassy takeover of 1979.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
International issues in the Iranian crisis |
by David North and Alex Lantier 25 June 2009
President Obama’s declaration, in his June 23 press conference, that he was “appalled and outraged” by the Iranian government’s reaction to protests over Iran’s presidential election results represents an escalation of US pressure on the clerical regime in Tehran. This direct statement, which he suggested was motivated by pressure from Republican Senator John McCain and more right-wing sections of the US bourgeoisie, was welcomed in the US media as the renewal of a more aggressive stance towards Iran.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 1 of 4 |
