Waiting Game
The AP reports on growing discontent with Ahmadinejad’s regime in Iran. Of course a lot of the Iranian people’s discontent predates his “election” and has to do with the mullahs who have squelched reform, but this report focuses on more recent economic and foreign policy gripes, and A’jad’s own precarious position with discontent from above as well as below.
Prices for vegetables have tripled in the past month, housing prices have doubled since last summer — and as costs have gone up, so has Iranians’ discontent with hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his focus on confrontation with the West.
… He is being challenged not only by reformers but by the conservatives who paved the way for his stunning victory in 2005 presidential elections. Even conservatives say Ahmadinejad has concentrated too much on fiery, anti-U.S. speeches and not enough on the economy — and they have become more aggressive in calling him to account.
… Tehran housewife Maryam Hatamkhani, 28, said her family has given up buying potatoes and tomatoes because prices have tripled or quadrupled in the past month. Tomatoes have gone from around 33 cents a pound to $1.50.
“People are really under pressure. We are unhappy. Instead of bringing welfare, this government has given us hardship,” she said.
Vahid Yousefi, a factory worker, moonlights as an informal cab driver at night to get by, picking up passengers in his car. He had hoped to buy a modest apartment in downtown Tehran last year but couldn’t afford it. In the six months since, home prices have doubled.
“I really can’t make ends meet,” said Yousefi, the father of two. “I will never be able to live in my own house.”
Lawmakers summoned Ahmadinejad’s Housing Minister Mohammad Saeedikia to parliament for questioning over the rising prices, which he blamed on increasing demand. He promised a plan to control prices, but gave no specifics.
… Reformist and conservative lawmakers are considering calling Ahmadinejad before parliament to answer questions about his nuclear diplomacy and economic policies. So far no date has been set for summoning him.
… Even the president’s globe-trotting has come under fire …
“Do you really assume people like Chavez (and) Ortega … can be Iran’s strategic allies?” the reformist daily Etemad-e-Melli said in an editorial Tuesday addressing Ahmadinejad. “We should not build a house on water.”
No mention of the elephant in the room: Khamenei, his expected death and ensuing power struggle. As Stratfor notes in the post below, this is going to be a big year in Iran. They are being challenged externally, by us. There is great uncertainty within.
Increased economic and diplomatic isolation, and smackdown of Iran’s proxies in Iraq would bring positive pressure to bear. Regarding direct attack on nuclear sites, this probably has to happen sooner or later anyway. A new regime is unlikely to do more than suspend that program for appearance’s sake unless it is a radically new regime. But the internal situation bears watching to see which way Iran will break. Attacks by the Great Satan, while they may be unavoidable, could serve to strengthen A’jad’s position when he needs it most, as there is nothing a rug-chewing tyrant likes better than an external threat.
Despite discontent that his grandstanding has brought Iran to this point, actual attack could cause critics to shut up and close ranks. This is a moment that calls for finesse and the application of the correct degree of pressure. In the short-term, as much as I hate to say it, speaking softly while visibly twirling a big stick that can be thwacked at any moment may be a better course, while awaiting situational development.
UPDATE:
Iranian missile strike on US ship didn’t happen. MSNBC
Other weird stuff out of Iran. Gateway.
Speaking of UFOs, a former Powell aide at State tells the Beeb that in 2003, Iran offered to help bring stability to Iraq, stop supporting Hamas and Hezbollah and give the Bush administration a great deal on the Brooklyn Bridge. Cheney said, “We don’t talk to evil.”
Topics: Uncategorized
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 9:47 am on Thursday, January 18, 2007
5 Responses to “Waiting Game”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
January 18th, 2007 at 4:30 pm
Obviously, I’m not entirely sure what his health status is, but I find his recent OK to the Mejlis to openly criticize Ahmadinejad now, this late in the Ayatollah’s game, perplexing. It seems as if it may be part of the power struggle that has already ensued.
It smells of a decree by a weak man being frantically advised by a loyal circle around him in attempts to plan for his death. The Council of Experts…an odd lot. Their only true power exists when there’s a Supreme Leader to be found. To be sure, the daggers are flying and this is likely one of them.
Personally, I will miss Ahmadinejad. He has done more to remove the false face of taqiyyah from the Iranian regime than an army of investigative reporters. Rafsanjani, who lost to Ahmadinejad in the elections and now seeks instead to replace Khameini as Supreme Leader, is cut of precisely the same cloth but merely more adroit and deft in mastering his projected image.
Note that he criticizes Ahmadinejad’s handling of the nuclear situation through belicose verbiage, but in the next breathe proclaims that the Iranian nuclear program absolutely must go on unabated.
Language is crafted as either a mask or a lens. I prefer the lens to the mask when the same creature lies beneath.
For once, Americans are paying attention to the world’s formost state sponsor of international terrorism. Not even September 11, 2001, acheived that. Thank you, Mahmoud.
January 18th, 2007 at 5:19 pm
[...] UPDATE: Others: Gateway Pundit, Jules Crittenden, [...]
January 18th, 2007 at 7:56 pm
I’m curious to see what effect the recent depressed oil prices will have on Iran. Waiting the Mullahs out until they lose internal control is better for us than having to fight a war with them.
January 18th, 2007 at 11:42 pm
But are the mullahs the only problem in Iran? There are power struggles going on, but I haven’t heard anything from any of the players that would tell me that peace will come with a change at the top. We are in the middle of a religious war going on in the Middle East, the main players being Iran and Saudi Arabia, and except as proxies and for propaganda purposes, neither Judaism nor Christianity has much to do with it. Now that the Cold War is over, if it weren’t for the oil, the West would sit on the sidelines and give it a tsk tsk.
January 18th, 2007 at 11:43 pm
I’d say we are fighting a war with them Rebecca. Feeding the Mahdi Army with weapons, cash and training as well as armor-piercing IED’s for al-Qaeda in Iraq transcends agressive diplomacy.
That it has gone on this long with tepid response shows that we truly do not want a war with them.
Perhaps an accident at a few of their gasoline refineries would shorten the wait a bit. Works faster internally than unpredictable oil prices which can be manipulated up with a couple of well-planned terrorist strikes.
They already lack the refining capacity to keep up with domestic gasoline demands. Perhaps just a nudge.