The morning after

The morning after
: Pedram distantly echoes Alireza — but in a much nicer way — in a lengthy post about July 9 and Western and weblog support for Iranian democracy. He concludes:

In short, we DO want your help, your solidarity, your sympathy. But if you want to lend a hand, let us be the ones deciding what help we may want or need. Talk to us, as a community and as individuals, find out about our aspirations and our objectives. Then assist us in our endeavor, if you see fit. Under our banner, carrying our message.

It’s almost as if both gentlemen are suffering morning-after regret, finding themselves waking up in bed with Americans and feeling just a bit claustrophobic about it. But I don’t think that’s it.

They do not want to see direct American intervention — that is, invasion or the installation of an externally chosen regime. We should be the first to concede that they have good cause for such concern, given American history in Iran. And they are a bit more concerned considering the war in Iraq and the fact that bloggers who supported that war are, in general, the ones most loudly supporting Iranian democracy.

I just want to say that they shouldn’t assume that the support of individuals in America and on blogs comes carrying that exact baggage.

I say the last thing we should do is install another shah! I say that I don’t want to see us militarily intervening in Iran.

But I do say that the mullahs need to go. I do say that Iranians deserve freedom in their politics and speech and even dress. I do support the efforts to gain that freedom there. Just because I’m an American, that doesn’t mean I’m ready to call in the CIA and/or the Marines.

All it means is that I respect the rights of the Iranian people and I hope that someday soon, their leaders will, too.

  • Now you use my quote but attribute it to Pejman? I’m sure that’s just a typo.
    It is not that we feel you support invasion of Iran. I have no doubt that 99.9% of those who displayed July 9th banners on their sites and regularly write about Iran and Iranians have nothing but the best intentions at heart.
    The problem starts when they are used by a very small minority to spread a line of thinking contrary to the wishes or aspirations of most Iranians.
    Let me state once again, most Iranians DO NOT want another revolution. Social upheavel, as promoted by the Michael Ledeen types, as well as Monarchists out of LA is not the chosen path for most of us to achieve freedom and establish a democracy. Next time you see somebody promote that line of thinking, take a second look where it is coming from. You saw how popular their call for a “general strike” was on the 9th. That should be an indication of their strenght and acceptance inside Iran.
    As I wrote, we want your solidarity and sympathy. But please let us do it our way and promote actions initiated by ourselves, not those that are created out of certain DC offices and spraed via TV stations in Santa Monica.

  • OOPS! Sorry. I’ve corrected my stupid typo.
    And I agree with the rest of your reply. I certainly have seen the very widely held theme regarding revolution/monarchists/Ledeen in Iranian bloggers and have heard that message. Were some trying to foment revolution on July 9? On the airwaves, it seems, yes. But I don’t think that’s the case on the blogosphere. I think you already have what you ask to have: support for this movement, however it is meant to come about.

  • MommaBear

    As one blogger who has been posting about the situation in Iran, trying to highlight the events as the occur, MB has NOT seen much in the way of concrete suggestions amongst the Iranian bloggers as to what they want to see if the mullahs are gone.
    Surely it is not wrong for us to make suggestions. That is one of the things that blogging is about: offering help. We’ve shown support for your aspirations of freedom; tell us what you want after that and we’ll try to help in that, too, but, absent any concrete proposals, it is not unusual to see us throw out ideas for consideration, nor should you be offended by it.

  • John Anderson

    I certainly do not want, or expect, a bloody revolution. Some may be necessary to get rid of the
    one military group directly controlled by the Supreme/Executive Council[s], but even there it may
    occur mostly peacefully. If those two groups are dumped, what remains seems to be an Islamic
    (not Islamist, I do try to keep pointing out the difference) democracy/republic.

  • I think, in addition, most of us believe you have more chance of peaceful change if we keep attention focused on Iran. And throwing out an occasional idea, as MB said, is mostly done because we haven’t seen any really concrete ideas (except possibly from the monarchists) and we’re trying to help in any way we can.