If you're curious about the dynamics and actors in the drama, go read this:
[TEHRAN BUREAU] The rigged presidential election in Iran - a coup d'etat, according to Mohsen Makhmalbaf, a spokesman for the main reformist challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi and other analysts - has prompted protests both inside and outside Iran. There is, however, little understanding about the ideology and motivation behind the operation.Along with Twitterfall (looking at #iranelections, #g88, #iran9), Tehran Bureau is a site that I've been reading compulsively for the last three days...
-
I'm concerned that this is about to turn violent. It looks like the regime has been arresting leaders and moving out officers whose loyalty is suspect. In preparation for what?
Mousavi is the key. I think they must be trying to either cow or reach a deal with him. He's got standing and the likely backing of the grand ayatollahs, so if he takes to the barricades people listen, and if he tells everyone to go home they will listen.
If I were Mousavi I'd be watching my back. Dead martyrs are less trouble than live rivals.
This isn't clear to me at all. Assuming that there's any political opportunism in Iran the populist gusher would be difficult to resist. A leader would very probably emerge to take advantage of it. It doesn't really appear to me that this is about Mousavi so much as a kind of "perfect storm" involving a number of factors, and the flawed election was a catalyst. However, I recall being thrilled at the young Chinese fellow defying the tanks too, so it's easy to be cynical.
Also, even though this uprising seems entirely justified on the merits, the notion that taking to the streets can overthrow a repressive regime suggests that it could also overthrow a legitimate polyarchy. That would be the dark underside. But, of course, Dahl's thesis was that polyarchies are more resilient, and perhaps we're seeing what he meant.