Official Posting Complete

I got on this morning and did my grading. If you add comments or posts after today (right now) you need to tell me via email or I won't know they are there. It probably won't count, but if you dazzle me I may feel generous. :> and if you just like blogging keep it up! Overall I think the project went really well. I look forward to reading your summaries/interpretations of the blog. Remember 2-5 pages: intro, 2-3 'themes', summary/conclusion

see you in class tomorrow!

2 Fun Links

As we're wrapping up this blog project, here are 2 links that might give you a laugh:

The first is an article in which an Iranian cleric states that women who dress scandalously cause earthquakes in Iran: click here

The second is a Bill Maher clip with "Muslim Dior Fashion Show": click here to have a laugh

As far as my opinion goes, I couldn't help but feel a little worried after laughing about the earthquake article. Thoughts included: How many people believe this cleric? and What kind of decisions are the people who DO believe this making? Anyway, hope you all enjoy

New Nuclear Deterant for Iran, or Another Antagonizing Action?

http://www.iranian.com/main/2010/apr/new-iranian-nuclear-deterrent

This article speaks of Israel taking its own action against Iran. As a national defense measure for Israel, they sent a UAV, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, Spyplane over Iran. The Iranians were a bit annoyed back then, but now especially after the nuclear summit, things seem to be bigger thorns in their side than before. This article coming from Iranian.com really brings out the feelings of Iranian people and I believe that this article stands for something bigger as the aggression steps up in the Middle East once more. Is Israel antagonizing for another war, much like during the 70s?; or is this truly just a mere concern for their safety, or both?

Iran Labels US "nuclear criminal"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8627143.stm

Iran held another nuclear summit, after President Obama's. I believe that this was an attempt to 'fight back' at the US for coming down so hard on Iran's nuclear development. President Ahmadinejad gives multiple reasons as to why Iran cannot use nuclear weapons; in my opinion these reasons are empty and nothing more than a scapegoat. This article is short but it is loaded with "between the lines reading" and i think that Iran is trying to demonize the United State's effort in nuclear disarmament.

Our Summer in Tehran

After watching "Promises", I saw that Justine Shapiro was involved in the production. I knew of her from the show "Globe Trekker," so I looked further into Promises Films Production, and saw info about another movie she is making "Our Summer in Tehran."

This movie is her attempt to reveal a little bit about the personal lives of 3 different Iranian families. It is a documentary. You can see in the trailer that before her visa is finished, she gets a call from Iranian influences who tell her to leave the country within 48 hours. At some point, they must have learned more about her film project, and they must not have agreed with the content in some way. She is surprised and upset.

Click here to see the trailer and Shapiro's reaction.

I know that the Iranian government puts up a facade for the outside world to see them differently, so somewhere during film production, "Our Summer in Tehran" probably rubbed this government image the wrong way. While I'm sure PromisesFilms wasn't trying to swindle information out of Iran, I'm glad that they managed to at least film some of their material and do some research. It seems like it was for a good cause, and I think that some Iranian citizens with repressed voices are proud of the work that PromisesFilms has started to do.

I'm excited for the film release now!

Middle East Peace

EDIT: For Some reason or another the link did not post, here it is, sorry.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303491304575187942850578732.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion

This link leads to an article discussing President Obama's new policy for the Middle East. I feel that the young president is very over ambitious in his plans and does not think of possible repercussion very often. I respect that he does his own thing and is a trailblazer. However, this is a very delicate issue, the US policy in the M.E., and i believe that he may not be able to live up to what he plans. We will certainly see but check this article out and let me know what you think.

Twitter and Iran

I saw several videos dealing with the twitter revolution and the use of digital media to spread information from the Iranian elections and protests. I thought I'd post this one because it's shorter and to the point. It's interesting how far technology has gotten. A few years ago we wouldn't be seeing this steady supply of images coming through. One of the news clips I saw that also covered this story was from the Rachel Maddow Show. She said that we are 6,000 miles from Tehran, but we've "never been closer." If something happens in Iran, someone can just upload their cell phone video to the internet, and the world can be watching within minutes.

I think that twitter is an important power the Iranians have. If it wasn't for that, their opinions would probably not reach us, but they would have more difficulty talking to each other. I wouldn't be surprised if twitter could bring the people of Iran together and start a real revolution in the government. Technology like this has great potential to bring people together. Just think of the recent flash mobs in Philadelphia. It started out with just a few people on Facebook, then people started finding out about it through there, and suddenly you have a large group of people meeting up on the streets because they saw it on a social networking site.

Televised Elections

http://www.rferl.org/content/In_Iran_The_Election_Is_Being_Televised/1752228.html

I thought this article was rather interesting. It talks about the small changes that happened throughout the election(televised debates, open criticism of Ahmadinejad, etc), and how it's slowly leading up towards more transparency and slowly inching towards democracy. It also talked about some of the red flags that had gone up during the election. None of the candidates were willing to question some of the regime's policies, such as the uranium enrichment program, the economic impact of sanctions or the unlimited power of the supreme leader.

Iraq's Feelings

http://www.newsweek.com/id/204333

I decided to bring Iraq up for some conversation and I think the article attached is very interesting. Iraq officials claim not to care about what happens with the election stating that it is an internal issue within Iran. I find this hard to believe and would think they had a lot riding on the election. To make a comparison imagine if a similar situation was going on in Canada or Mexico can you imagine the interest the US would take in that situation. That being said this has always been and remains a very unstable region as we have discussed in class and if these countries ever want to gain control they need to work together and this attitude will not help matters. Being such a small area the decisions of one country can greatly affect another.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124526049259323973.html

I have included another similar article to reinforce the situation.

The Big Picture

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/06/irans_disputed_election.html

The link above contains thirty pictures from after the election in 2009 and i posted this for a couple reasons. The images appear to have been posted by supporters of Mousavi and I only say this because in most of the photos it shows his supporters being beaten but what really intrigued me was the about of anger and, I don't know if its the right word but, passion that these people show for the person they support. The riots are bloody, old men point canes at young women, and it doesn't matter who you are or what you do, just who you voted for. This just reinforces that the country needs a strong leader who is well liked to bring all of these people together. I believe the images are also showing how, if in fact it was posted by Mousavi supporters, that images can have a lot if power over our feelings. These images make us feel for the supporters when in fact during the riots they most likely injured, if not killed, people who supported the opposition.

Iranian Women

Not being from the Middle East I have many questions about the women from that area. I hear stories of women being repressed in Iran. Do the women accept the repression, maybe they feel they are maintaining the status quo, or have they started to change some of the norms of their country to extend their individual rights? When I typed in Iranian women into youtube the first two videos that came up on the page showed different views of Iranian women. The first video shows Iranian women being harassed for not following Islamic Dress Code, and the second video shows the beauty and style of young Iranian women.
The first video shows a news report where an Iranian woman is standing with a police officer and bullying young women into covering up their hair. Although the women were dressed quite conservatively by Western standards, they were breaking the Islamic Dress Code. The fact that a police officer was standing with the abusive woman shows that the Iranian government supports this kind of behavior. To my surprise the next video on the page showed pictures of Iranian women playing sports, particpating in very "non traditional" competitions, and the overall diverse style of Iranian women. It shows Iranian women generally wear clothes that are a combination of traditional and liberal styles. I think they look pretty good. The video changed my perception of Iranian women immensly. Iranian women are not just repressed and traditional, many young Iranian women seem to be very liberal and empowered.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgXgpngHf60
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9mn31ESQxo

Bill Maher talks about Iran with Rahm Emanuel.

This is an older video from 2007, but it still has relevance to today as they are talking about Ahmadinejad. Bill Maher makes some good points about the Iranian president here. This guy has always been hated by the people of our country. But how much do you really know about this guy except for what you've heard on the news? Remember when he spoke at Columbia University? He was a big story then. The news was all over the comments he said there. In this brief segment from his show, Maher talks about how the media likes to pick on him, and says some pretty truthful things.

Beautiful Iran

When I search thorough youtube for media related to Iran the majority of videos that I find portray Iran negatively. I typed in the word Iran into the search engine, and the videos that showed up on the page were about why America will go to war with Iran and the violent protests that ensued after the 2009 presidential elections. After further looking I stumbled across a video titled Beautiful Iran. I feel it is really important to watch this video because it shows the poorly publicized "lighter-side" of Iran.
Beautiful Iran does a great job at showing the vast geography of the country. It shows everything from Iran's mountains, plains, deserts, and scenic countrysides. The video also briefly shows what daily life is like for Iranians. It shows men working, mostly herding, people going to the markets, and children hanging out and playing outside. There are also pictures of the gorgeous, elaborate architecture that can be found throughout Iran. Finally I love the music in the background. To my "western ears" it sounds almost Spanish because of how the guitar is played. The guy is like the Iranian Santana or something.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9oIZpFFyIY

The Daily Show's Jason Jones in Iran

Not sure exactly who is speaking in the background, but I remember watching this on the Daily Show a little while back. Jason Jones actually went to Iran to cover the elections for laughs, but here he talks about some of the things he saw. I put this up because I really enjoyed the Rick Steves video on Iran, and I think it's interesting show Steves and Jones have almost the same feelings toward the Iranian people. All just further proof to show that regular your average Iranian citizen isn't what our media would make us believe. Being a traveler at heart, it just makes me want to go there more to check things out for myself.

Al Jazeera English - Middle East - Palestinians mark Prisoners' Day

Al Jazeera English - Middle East - Palestinians mark Prisoners' Day

The video and the article that goes along with this , just gives another reason why Palestinians and Israelis hatred will build up and the fighting between the two groups will never end and will continue through generations to come.

What we are fighting for in Afghanistan

here goes to show that sometimes U.S. foreign policy of promoting democracy isn't such a great plan. Democracy is great when the country wants to change it ideology , democracy can not be forced for U.S. interest

The Golden Hour - Afghanistan

Clerics and Power

http://www.tremblethedevil.com/2009/06/do-what-to-a-chicken.html

This is a blog I read fairly frequently, dealing with terrorism, and the introduction provides a very good snapshot of what the author wants to accomplish.
This post came out a while ago, but it illustrates the reasons for the tension behind the elections. I'll quote the most important parts below, but the entire post is well worth reading.

----"Now going onto the government and why the people are sick and tired of it. Basically, the government hasn’t stayed true to its promise, and the poor are still poor and the rich were driven out of Iran pretty much. The clerics have all the money. The average salary of an Iranian is equal to about $300 a month, which is pretty good with their cost of living…. the average cleric makes $50,000 a month just for being a cleric, and $500,000 a month if they actually preach at a mosque. Compare that to the cost of living here, and their salary would well over $1,000,000 a month just for sitting on your ass and wearing a fancy robe.

Also, many of the clerics have gone against their teachings, you can see a lot of them wearing fancy Italian shoes and expensive slacks. This goes against the teachings of anti-materialism that they learned. Also Khamenei, the poster boy for clerics, moved into a mansion about 20 years ago with the excuse that he needed it for extra protection. (No one knows the location of his house as it’s kept secret for his protection.)

The reason the people are so pissed off now isn’t just because the elections were supposedly rigged. It’s also because the government spends too much money serving the clerics (majority of taxes go toward “religious funds” which translates to the clerics’ salaries). Also the government has ownership over 100% of business and all institutions. Even private businesses are technically owned and monitored by the government. These were all things that Mousavi promised to stop, he also promised to get rid of Iran’s bad image of Anti-America and Anti-Israel

In reality most Iranians don’t give two shits about the affairs of a bunch of Palestinians that throw rocks over a country the size of Delaware."-----

Iran Calls US "World's only Atomic Criminal"

http://blogs.abcnews.com/jim_sciutto_frontlines/2010/04/iran-calls-us-worlds-only-atomic-criminal-calls-for-its-suspension-from-iaea.html

Yep. Hard to refute their point of view, the US is the only nation to have used a nuclear weapon on another country. No matter how we may justify that action, it is fact.
To me, this is another example of Iran's ability to manipulate the headlines. We have a hard time understanding their culture, and their point of view, simply because it is not western at all. We're blinded by our perceptions, but it is an even worse situation than we thought, in terms of diplomacy, because while we have a hard time looking at things their way, they are perfectly attunated to our way of thinking. They know how to play our game, and raise the stakes.
Iran can screw around with the international community and know that all America will do is threaten to "impose crippling sanctions." All Iran has to do is say in a public forum that their uranium is for peaceful purposes, meanwhile denying anyone any significant way of verifying that because they are clearly lying, and then just continue on with business as usual.
For them, all they need to do is get to the point where they have nuclear weapons, and then, just like North Korea, they can shut themselves away from the world and not worry about the repercussions.

iranian election - WN.COM advanced search

iranian election - WN.COM advanced search

This Following pages has quite a few video clips concerning the Iranian election. It looks to compare the various ways differing networks around the one gave coverage to the recent election.Contrary to an article I've previously posted it agrees with most things westerners have been exposed to, that the election was tampered with. This clips exposes how dispite the clear rules of equal coverage oppertunity not all the candidates recieved equally coverage. The extra attention given to the incumbent was very evident. While the previous article I posted said that polls take days before the election put the incumbent ahead with a large market this video clips gives audiences a glimpse in how that statement may be true, yet fraudently. Polls may have put the incumbent ahead by a large margin yet such polls, newspapers, and television channels are easily controlled by the government. The polls could have been tampered with to give the incumbent a basis to support himself when his victory was known. If the election was tampered with I am sure the persons involved would have fabricated more information to attempt to legitimize the final results. However, Bush was not the popular canidate in 2000 yet still was victorious and like the clip mentions the President of Iran is not the highest power like in the U.S it is the Clergy man who heads the nuclear program and such. Thus, we ought to be tracking his current doings along with the President.

Smoke Screen

I feel as if every time I find an article on the emergence of Iran and the untapped potential it has, I find an article that says it is internally crumbling. I have found articles that say that Iran spends billions of dollars a year to keep things like clean water and electricity alive in their country. I do not see how a country that spends that much money on things like that contending amongst the world's elite. I wonder how long this smoke screen of a dominant country can stand if they have so many problems with infrastructure and political corruption.
The issue that we are supposed to be looking at, the Iranian elections, are an example of the corruption in politics and the corruption that has plagued Iran for years. The following article talks about how even after an election that caused criticism, Iran's politics are still corrupted.
Iran speaks of how they want to be a player on the world stage, and granted a lot of countries have political corruption. However, few countries have been caught and then proceeded to continue the corruption. I see stories of an Iran that intimidates many countries including the mighty and all powerful United States. However, I also see an Iran that suppressed its people's rights, is corrupt politically, and is struggling with the daily living of its people. This election was supposed to be one of change. There were new movements within Iranian politics, but they were squashed. Things have stayed the same for Iran politcally, and that means that Iran's position in the world stage will stay the same as well. They create an illusion that they are progressing, but if they cannot progress domestically they cannot progress internationally. Things like this make it seem as if the United States position of opposing the Iranians strongly will hold out and win.


http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2009/978/re73.htm

Time to Engage Iran

Last week my group was assigned to look at the comments made by Flynt Leverett in the debate regarding Iran. His attitude was the we needed to engage Iran and that there were no other options. He believed that this would mark an historical event and compared it to Nixon going to China during the seventies. The act of Nixon going to China, seperated China from the rest of the communist countries of the time period. This singled them out as a good guy and someone that all of the United States' allies could trust. The same could be done to Iran, Leverett argues. This could seperate Iran and show the rest of the world that this volatile, unstable country is worth having diplomatic relations with. This would seperate Iran from the rest of the countries that the average American thinks is harboring terrorists. The move would help the United States in the region while also calming the feuds in the region.
Based on the article that I found and from my own thoughts, does the United States and the rest of the world really have another choice? The comparison the Leverett made between China and Iran is accurate, but what happened as a result may scare the people opposed to Iran. That move gave China serious economic and political power. They are on the verge of becoming a serious super power for a long duration of time. I do not think that leaders around the world are ready to give that amount of power to Iran. Last class we talked about how strong Israel became due to the recognition of its country by other powers around the world. The United States recognizing Iran would supplement all of the other countries in the world. The power that United States recognition has in limitless. However, I do not think that the world has a choice.

Iran's president,Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has become a hero to other Muslim countries and to his people. He is starting to be portrayed in the media as a savior and as a good person. Also, Iran has been put under sanctions for more than 30 years. They have a strong leader who understands what his competition is trying to do to him. He understands the power he can yield if Iran becomes the tenth country with nuclear capability. That is why the world has no choice, but to engage Iran. Their power is on the verge of becoming mighty and they are not going to stop until it is. If the United States engages Iran it will bring validity to everything that they have been working for. The best part for Iran is that the United States may not have a choice.


http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2010/993/re7.htm

Iranian Anger Rises Over Obama’s Revised Nuclear Policy

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/12/world/middleeast/12iran.html

This article just came out on the 11th, and its all about America being the bag guy basically, which most of the time..... we are. Obama has issued a new nuclear policy that makes Iran and Korea possible targets and Iran is not pleased about this. There is Talk of America disrupting world peace, by implementing this new policy, check it out and let me know what you think.

Al-Ahram Weekly | Opinion | Iran's democratic upsurge

Al-Ahram Weekly Opinion Iran's democratic upsurge


Allow me to preface my analysis of this article by explaining that it was written by Hamid Dabashi. He is an Iranian-American who was born and raised in Iran. He was educated in his native home as well as in the U.S. He is extremely intelligent and informed; he holds degrees from University of Pennsylvania and Harvard. He currently teaches at Columbia University in New York, New York. Dabashi lectures around the world and is a cultural critic. His experitise is in cinema and post colonialism. He is also a frequent contributor to Al-Ahram.

Dabashi has also been open in interviews as not being particularly found of the Israeli's and more or less has described the nation as a puppet for western ideology and agendas. Thus, this is crucial to know and take into consideration before reading his analysis of the election and his criticisms of the west.

Intrestingly enough Dabashi does not dissmiss the fact that the election outcome could have resulted from fruad or corruption unlike a previous post of mine. In fact he almost mentions it as a matter of fact. Instead he quicky turns to highly the democratic ways in which the people of Iran have begun to exersise their ability to vote. He also notes that the tide is changing among the people. The youth of the nation do not remember the revolution and are moving away from the radical aspects and embracing the conservative take on politics. YET, Dabashi is mention Obama's use of "imposing" democracy on the region constantly and that the democractic advances of Iran are not well recieved by US/Israeli forces. The author is sure to mention that these forces have invested much time into justifing bombing Iran and portraying it at sheer evil; consquently the Iran change toward democratic ways is "slap in the face" they ought to proud of.

It seems as if Dabashi is in favor of this more toward democracy to spite the US/Israeli forces instead of for the betterment of his homeland. I could be wrong in that assumtion, yet it is intriguing that a man so supportive of his country and exposing the "truth" did not return there to educate others. I would also be curious as to why his family moved him here to begin with. He is clearly educated and has found success in the states, however it is also clear, through his connotaion, this man views himself as Iranian before American.

Al-Ahram Weekly | Opinion | Post-election Iran

Al-Ahram Weekly Opinion Post-election Iran

This article describes the Iranian nation's history as vunlnerable. The author states several times that regimes often fall after a given period of time and notes that this past election may be marking the turn in a new direction for the nation. The author further expresses his belief that Iran ought to stay open to the idea of mending realtions as well as forging new bonds with forgien nations. This component forces me to question how vulnerable is Iran. While the author is not involved with politics he is a native of the region. I wonder to whom has spoken with in regaurds to this particular article and for what reasons does he think remaining open minded is intrigate.However the author does disscuss the influences of a new generation of people who do not remember the revolution and the continued influence of outside nations via mass media sources. Thus, his conclusion could very well be strickly a personal opinion, in regaurds to the ever changing youth of Iran.

The things the west excluded... Iranian election '09

Al-Ahram a weekly online publication intently followed the Iranian election this past fall. The article is very direct in stating the aspects surrounding the election that western sources did not include in their coverage. The article explictedly lists ten key points that western audiences may still be unaware of. The author specifically states the following facts were excluded:
1. Ahmadinejad had been mayor of Tehran in 2003, depsite claims his competor was more liked in this crucial city.
2. Ahmadinejad had been ahead by a substantial lead for weeks prior to the election, thus his victory was forseeable.
3. Western media only followed his competiors and failed to report that Ahmadinejad's rallies had the highest audience attendence of all the canidates.
4. Western media did not report the complexity of the council that monitors fraud within any given election.
5. Nor did it report is effectiveness.
6. Western media also did not take into consideration that a new election may discourage minorities group who were wary of voting in the first place from returning to the polls.
7. Islam does not tolerate fraud and can be punishable by death
8. Western media did not acknowledge Ahmadinejad acknowledgement of jewish suffering in the past but rather reported he did not reconginize the holocaust. nor did they make his official transcript available.
9. Ahmadinejad's opponents were linked to wester allies in monetary ways but it was not well publicized.
10. Lastly, the author notes that Americans do not support reporting the truth.

The author refers to the 2000 election and a reporter by the name of David Barstow. This NY Times reporter uncovered a connection between officials in the pentagon who helped pust the Iraq war and companies who directly, monetarily, benefited from an upcomming war. Yet, his accomplishment was swept under the rug and he was not rewarded for his work.


Thus, after reading this article I am inclined to agree that the western coverage of this election may have been one sided. The over all outlook on the election was designed with a bias. I still am unsure whether I think the actual election was the result of corruption/or fraud. However I am sure that the coverage of the election masked the larger picture of what really took place.
9.

Italian workers held in Afghan assassination plot

By the CNN Wire Staff

April 11, 2010 4:31 a.m. EDT

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Three Italians, six Afghans planned suicide attacks, authorities claim
• Targets allegedly included southern Helmand governor, Gulab Mangal
• Suspects worked for Italian medical charity Emergency in Lashkar Gah
• Authorities found suicide vests, explosives hidden amid medicine at clinic

RELATED TOPICS

• Afghanistan
• Helmand Province
• The Taliban

Kabul, Afghanistan (CNN) -- Afghan authorities have arrested three Italian medical workers in a plot to assassinate the governor of the southern Helmand province.

The three workers were arrested Saturday along with six Afghans from a hospital run by Milan-based Emergency in Lashkar Gah, the capital of Helmand province.

Emergency is one of the few foreign-run clinics in the city.

The nine were planning to conduct suicide attacks in the province, said Daud Ahmad, the provincial governor's spokesman.

Authorities said the suspects had taken $500,000 from the Pakistan Taliban to launch their attack in a crowded location when Gov. Gulab Mangal was present.

Authorities found two suicide vests, two pistols and explosives hidden in medicine cartons at the clinic, Ahmad said.

Emergency has maintained a presence in Afghanistan for more than a decade, with its Lashkar Gah clinic treating more than 66,000 people, the group said.

In 2007, a hospital staffer mediated between the Afghan government and the Taliban to secure the release of kidnapped Italian journalist Danielle Mastrogiacomo.

Mastrogiacomo was freed but an Afghan translator, Ajmal Naqshbandi, was killed by militants.

Afghan authorities now say the three arrested Italians killed Naqshbandi.

The Italian government could not immediately be reached for comment.

The charity said it has not been able to reach the three employees by phone.

"This accusation sounds simply groundless to us, and we are absolutely certain that the truth will come forth quickly," the nongovernment organization said in a statement on its Web site.

Afghan authorities have not contacted it to explain the reasons for the detention, the group said.

"These are individuals who for years have been working to ensure medical treatment for the Afghan people," the statement said. "We ask that their rights be respected, the first of which is to allow them to communicate with us and let us know their personal conditions."

Journalist Matiullah Mati contributed to this report.

Iranian Election Protests

After the 2009 Iranian presidential election many Iranians felt the election had been fixed. The U.S., U.K., European Union, and several other western countries expressed concern over "irregularities" during the election. The opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi was quoted saying 14 million unused ballots were missing which opened an opportunity for manipulating the results.
Mir Hossein Mousavi was the presidential candidate for the green party in the 2009 Iranian presidential election. That is why you see a lot of the protestors wearing green or waving green flags. You will see demonstrators with their hands covered in red they did this to pay respects to people who were dying. This video really portrays the ainxt green party supporters felt after the elections, as well as the brutality that was inflicted on the opposition supporters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0NRIMrnce0

Iran: The New USSR

I found this article by searching far and wide through Google. It is entirely too difficult to find articles from uncommon/foreign outlets on the world's largest search engine, but that is another issue.
This article talks about the looming economic sanctions against Iran due to their tremendous debt. They are dealing with unemployment and inflation ranging around 20%, which is astronomical for that type of data. Iran also has an unstable banking and currency system. The article says that Iran is using billions upon billions from subsidies that they have no intention nor the capibility of paying back. As is well documented, there has been plenty of political corruption in Iran. The elections of 2009 and the connections we are studying show this to be true, but this is also a reason that Iran is in such economic trouble. There are many opposing sides within the government and from religious factions. The President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has made the banks give out loans with incredibly low interest rates, and has made other questionable decisions. The only thing keeping their economy alive is their exporting of oil, which is a common tale in the region. However, the most important part of this article is where the pressure to impose the sanctions are coming from. The United States. This rivalry reminds us of the Cold War, with Iran having nuclear capability, but also having a smoke screen that tries to show a country of power.
The United States, along with the United Nations, has imposed sanctions on Iran before,and have even weakened their strongest export, oil, by discouraging foreign companies from investing. However, the sheer fact that the United States is involved with Iran speaks volumes. I compare it to the Cold War with the USSR. Iran has a volatile leader in Ahmadinejad who compares to the many Soviet leaders, and it has a scary idea. The United States still does not know how to handle the ideal of Islam just as it did not know how to deal with the idea of communism. The United States had a different tactic in attacking the economy of the USSR by increasing their own spending, but they are doing a similar thing to the Iranians. They are pushing for more economic sanctions which will hurt Iran instead of increasing their already ridiculous spending. The USSR apparently had atomic weapons as does Iran. The similarities go on and on. However, the most similar characteristic is the appearance of stability in Iran. Just as the USSR did, Iran's leaders have created an illusion of a strong and capable nation. However, there are reports every day of retention of human rights, riots at universities, and a struggling economy. There is one quote from the article that is very telling:
Iran's economic problems are linked to its extensive use of subsidies — billions of dollars a year — to keep basic necessities such as electricity, gasoline, bread and other food staples far below their true market value (Shuster)."
Iran is having to spend billions of dollars to keep the daily infastructure of their country alive. This is exactly what the USSR had to do during the Reagan years to make it seem like they were still a force to be reckoned with(there are many that say Reagan did not have anything with the downfall of the USSR that is was just a matter of time). It may be the case with Iran, as it was with the USSR, that the country will ruin itself before the United States can do any visible damage. Iran is one of the few countries standing up the United States in an era of American dominance, the United States if fighting back economically, and Iran could be done by the end of the rivalry. That sounds a lot like a modern day USSR.


http://www.scpr.org/news/2010/04/05/irans-economic-troubles-mount-as-sanctions-loom/

Iranian Election Divides Arabs, Their Leaders

I found this article on NPR News. It states the reactions of the Arab world to the reactions of Iran's election (in other words, the regional reactions to Iran's reactions):

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105874359

First, the article shows an example of "ordinary Arabs" outside of Iran showing support for the reformers. They are protesting how the Iranian government dealt with these reformers. I found it interesting that many of these "ordinary Arabs" were Iranian expatriates. These individuals do not seem worried about Iran's reaction to their "disloyalty" to the nation. Maybe they were secure in their position in their new nation, and felt more free to protest Iran from this new position.

Next, the article mentions the tendency of other Middle Eastern nations to be more cautious in their responses. It seems that they didn't want to choose a stance too quickly. They must have feared "choosing the wrong side" before finding out who came out on top in the elections. Reasons for this seem to be: 1) other nations feared that interfering in Iran will spread its unrest to their governments, and 2) the desire to sit back while Iran "self-destructs"

I also found it interesting that one of the men who was interviewed didn't want to give his name. This must be a common request (if people even choose to give information to international sources at all). It seems that international media has been receiving info from the most secure, confident, and sneaky sources. I would like to know what the people who are too afraid to speak up would REALLY say about the election. Maybe we will never truly know until the unrest in Iran dies down a little, and until the government stops (corrupting?) the ability to speak freely.

In the meantime, many individuals (as well as entire nations) will continue to wait until they know where the other side truly stands before speaking up. This tendency to "react to reactions" is an unfortunate drawback that eliminates the ability for a more free political system.