Zcom_simple

Ignore All the Iran Experts




Change Text Size a- | A+


Predictions about Iran are a dime a dozen these days. And that's exactly what they're worth.

Déja vu: The crowds in Iran look awfully familiar. And they're just as unpredictable as they were in 1978.

Troops are out in Iran this week, but in many cases the crowds have grown so large that the security forces are standing back and letting them swarm silently and peacefully through the boulevards -- just like in 1978.

Chants of Allah-o-akbar, God is great, reverberate from rooftops at night, expressing popular revulsion against the dictatorial regime -- just like 1978. The government has assaulted university campuses and shut down the opposition's offices, but these and other crackdowns have only sparked further protest -- just like 1978.

Are we witnessing a repeat of the Islamic Revolution that brought down the monarchy 30 years ago? If so, it would be wonderful irony. It would mean that the children of the revolution -- the large majority of the population that was born and raised under revolutionary institutions, that went to schools purged for Islamic purity and was fed Islamically-correct television and radio -- had devoured the system that nurtured them.

The irony of the situation is not lost on the protesters themselves. In their text messages from the streets and their phone calls overseas, the Iranian opposition exhibits tremendous self-awareness. They speculate constantly about whether the Islamic revolution is coming full circle. 

They note the parallels between this week's outburst of protest and the heroic events of 1978, which their revolutionary schoolbooks taught them in great detail. They liken the closing of universities this week to the shah's closing of universities in November 1978. They speculate whether this week's marches are equivalent to the massive Tasua and Ashura marches of December 1978. The clash earlier this week between a small group of militants and security forces at a paramilitary base in Tehran may have been an homage to the popular convergence on an air-force base in Tehran that sparked the final overthrow of the monarchy in February 1979.

But the biggest similarity between the current protests and the Islamic revolution is the population's widespread confusion about what comes next. In a year from now, people will look back on this week and say that what happened was inevitable. Whatever happens, they will predict the outcome retroactively. Already, experts are providing rough drafts for these explanations, such as:

A charismatic and enigmatic opposition leader is serving as a rallying point for different sectors of society, who all imagine that he shares their varied political positions; the opposition is too small and divided to pose a serious threat to the regime.

The main leaders of the opposition movement -- presidential candidate Mir Hossein Musavi and his ally, former President Mohammad Khatami -- are not calling for a revolution, only for a resumption of the Islamic Republic's previous electoral procedures; during the violence of a revolution, moderation often gives way to more radical demands.

In the months prior to the outburst, oil prices boomed and busted, along with the global economic downturn; the government still controlled billions of dollars in reserves that it doled out to supporters through barely disguised giveaways.

The Internet, cell phones, and satellite television have added new networking capabilities to the age-old rumor mill; access to these technologies is not universal in Iran, and is being shut down by the government.

The ruling elite is too divided to repress the opposition effectively; the ruling elite is pulling together and cannot be toppled.

Violent repression will keep people from protesting much longer; violent repression will backfire and produce even more protesters.

Concessions will buy time for the regime while tempers cool; concessions will only whet the opposition's appetite.

Outrage and grievance is boiling over; this week's protests are a safety valve blowing off harmless steam.

In a year's time, some of these experts will crow that events have confirmed their analyses. Others will quietly remove this week's remarks from their Web sites.

Yet all of these analyses are wrong, even if events unfold the way they predict. After all, if you make enough predictions, some are bound to look accurate. They are wrong because the outcome of this week's events is simply unpredictable. Unpredictable means that no matter how well-informed you may be, it is impossible to know what will happen next. Moments of turmoil make a mockery of accumulated knowledge.

Routine behavior, on the other hand, can be predicted. It is likely to occur tomorrow the way it occurred yesterday, with adjustments for shifts over time. But breaks from routine are a different beast altogether. The more that people feel that normal rules of behavior no longer hold, the more they search around for new rules, surveying their neighbors, collecting rumors, checking their text messages in a frantic attempt to figure out what everyone else is planning to do. Very few people are willing to be the only ones out in the street when the security forces start to advance. If people expect millions of their compatriots to demonstrate, many will want to help make history.

That's what Iranians are trying to figure out this week. "Where are we going?" asked one protestor who had been beaten by the police with a baton."We don't know how far this will go," another demonstrator told a reporter. "Anything is possible," said another.

Some protesters are giddy about the possibilities. "We have removed the rubbish that was injected into us by the regime, which turned people against one another," one student e-mailed to friends outside of Iran. "We are entering a new day. Our heads are high and eyes focused far on the horizon. Every single day the scope of this horizon expands, and in every single cell of our bodies we feel that we are ascending and rising up towards greater beauties."

Others despair that the future looks bleak. "Where are we today?!" a young oppositionist asked in distress on her blog as the protests began. "We don't know what to do. We don't know where to take refuge." Organizers of the protests aim to calm these concerns with the promise of safety in numbers. "Do not fear, do not fear, we are all together," demonstrators chanted in Tehran.

Opponents of regime change are also confounded by this week's events. "Why isn't the security apparatus getting involved?" a pro-regime Web site complained after the first large demonstration. The site then helpfully listed the names of 42 opposition leaders "in hopes that the security and military apparatuses will respond with less leniency and greater severity of action toward this situation."

Such moments of mass confusion are unsettling and rare. They usually fade back into routine. Occasionally, however, they create their own new routines, even new regimes, as they did in 1978-1979. In later retelling of these episodes, especially by experts, confusion is often downplayed, as though the outcomes might have been known in advance. But that is not how Iranians are experiencing current events. Their experience, and their response to their experience, will determine the outcome.

So this week, while the political future of Iran seems undecided, let us take note of the undecidedness, so that we won't forget it.


Charles Kurzman is professor of sociology at the University of North Carolina and author of The Unthinkable Revolution in Iran.

690577

Re: Ignore All the Iran Experts

By Kane, Paul at Jun 21, 2009 10:30 AM

Humanity marches into chains, chanting OBAMA, MOUSAVI, FREEDOM!!! 

 

Reply this comment


The user who created this comment no longer exists.


Person

Allow me to praise a bit of ambiguity

By Saviano, Jeff at Jun 19, 2009 17:54 PM

Although it is certainly sensible for people to be seeking a fairly easy-to-summarize guide of what is going on in Iran right now, Kurzman's piece here subtley reminds us that there is more complexity than is allowed for by our necessary models, that reminds us that those truly interested in human liberation have to simultaneously recognize the empirical humility we face in complex events.

Professor Kurzman is reminding us that things do not always go as the participants plan, and in fact, there are times in which the multiplicity of participants act with sometimes common purpose and yet at times with only shared instincts.

There's nothing immoral or weak in noting that from time to time, human events seem to exceed the sum of their parts' aspirations.

Reply this comment


670910

US exceptionalism

By Hegarty, Terence at Jun 19, 2009 13:00 PM

"Their experience, and their response to their experience, will determine the outcome." Why is this true of the human race in general, except for Americans? The rich can do anything to poor Americans, and they just carry on in perpetual misery.

Reply this comment


The user who created this comment no longer exists.


Person

Re: Ignore All the Iran Experts

By notme, at Jun 19, 2009 11:29 AM

Gee, I wish I'd become a 'professor'. Then I could write long pieces that could be summarized in one sentence, that being 'I don't know what the heck is going on.'  Only a professor could use so many words to express their own ignorance.

Of course, I don't know what's going on either.  Its just that I don't write long articles promoting myself as an expert while stating that fact.  Which, I guess is why I'm neither a professor nor an 'expert'.

-----------

RE the comments below.  Any revolution always has a large percentage of the crowds that are 'misguided and naive kids tilting at windmills.'  That doesn't mean that any crowd of 'misquided and naive kids' is always a revolution, but pretty much every revolution has them as a component.  That's almost always a description of the crowds that go into the streets.

And, 'majority' does not mean 'almost everyone'.  'Majority' is 50% +1, and is a very different concept from 'almost everyone'.  'Almost everyone' is a very high standard that is almost never met during any revolution since there are always those in power and making money from the current regime and who therefore oppose any change.  Thus, it is very rare that 'almost everyone' is in favor of a revolution. In fact, I'd doubt that was true in Iran in the 1970's.  As an example, it certainly was not true in the America colonies in the 18th century.

------------

One thing not to forget.  The 1970's Iran revolution was not just the clerics wanting an Islamic state. There was also a modern middle-class component, largely centered on the universities, that oppose the shah and wanted a more democratic state.  They had common cause with the clerics in opposing the shah, but not in setting up a relgiously ruled state.  There have been conflicts between these forces in the past, and it shouldn't be a surprise that they are appearing again.  This is a very fundamental conflict between 'conservatives' who want theocratic state and others who want a free and democratic state. 

You'll find similar conflicts in any state where a group tries to impose religious rule.  For instance, its a component of the conflict in America between those who want a 'christian' state and those who want 'freedom of (or from) religion'.

If trying to figure out CIA or otherwise US involvement, its likely you'll never be able to separate such things as the CIA will always use existing tensions and fault lines in a society to their advantage.  Thus, it is quite possible that this is both a US sponsered 'color' revolution and a legitimate uprising.  The US sponsered groups that support the 'color' revolutions will never just create unrest out of thin air, but instead will always support otherwise legitimate movements.

Because of this, at times, those who support freedom might find themselves on the same side as the US sponsered groups trying to overthrow governments.  And I doubt that we could ever afford to always oppose the 'color' revolutions, as to do so would at times mean opposing people who are legitimately out in the streets calling for more freedom in their society.

 

Reply this comment


Amys_pic_of_me

my two cents

By McGehee, Michael at Jun 19, 2009 08:05 AM

this is not a revolution. these are misguided and naive kids tilting at windmills.

in a lot of ways these mousavi supporters are like supporters of the democrats, except they are braver. both are distracted with illusions.

mousavi only had a chance at running because the real powers that be - the supreme leader and his unelected guardian council - approved his campaign. just like obama only had a chance to at running because the real powers that be - the ruling class - financed his campaign.

all the green and "wheres my vote" are just empty slogans centered around a farcical election and a puppet. in the late 70s the students didnt appeal through the Shah's farcical system. They rose up against the Shah. Now, the students are appealing through the farcical system when they should be rising up against the supreme leader.

Reply this comment

Comment_reply

Pink

Re: my two cents

By Tadjpour, Layla at Jun 19, 2009 13:54 PM

It is easy for you from where  you are to say that they should be rising up against Khameni!   During 1999 sutdent unrest, they chanted gainst Khamnei and were supressed brutally. Most of these 'naive kids" know  that the supreme leader is behind al lthis but they don't feel they have the power to topple him yet. Although, if the protests grow, they might be directly attacknng him.  and by the way, the protest cut across all socail groups and ages, middle class, lower class, women men, youth, religous, non religous.

Reply this comment


The user who created this comment no longer exists.

Recent Kurzman Content

Znetarticle_icon ZNet Articles
Loading_border