Roya Hakakian: Under the Veil

A year has passed since the 2009 elections in Iran, but the regime has not. Nor is this the same regime of pre -2009. A certain democratic mask, which many pundits once saw as the true face of an authentic Islamic — albeit imperfect — democracy, fell off Tehran’s face. The waves of assault on and executions of activists have all but ended whatever illusions had existed about Tehran’s brutality. As the global Christian community unanimously and justifiably pillories the Vatican over sexual abuse by their clergy, some even calling for the resignation of the pope for bygone cases, scores of young Iranian men and women activists were raped in Iranian prisons in recent months while the supreme leader, the pope of the Shiite world, looked on and continues to rule without a challenge from the global Islamic community (click here).

Any doubts that may have lingered about the nature of Iran’s republic fell away over these months as it became clear that it is the Revolutionary Guard Corp, the religious junta, who are in charge today.

These shifts in the perception of Iran, however, are mostly limited to observers around the world. The passage of this year has registered differently among Iranians living inside the country. A group of experts, who shall go unnamed, drew a random sample consisting of 500 individuals nationwide to measure the dominant perceptions within Iranian society — on the prospects of the regime’s fall, their faith in their own ability to enable this collectively, and their ideas about the tactics that could facilitate such a change.

The results, hardly uplifting, speak to the current general frustration nationwide. The pollsters have observed a sharp rise among the educated, upper middle class Iranians to emigrate —Australia and Canada are the two most popular destinations. Other alarming trends are also on the rise. There is a growing disappointment with the two former presidential candidates, Messrs. Moussavi and Karroubi, both with the depth of their commitment to a complete overhaul of the current political system and in their ability to lead the nation through the process. Disillusionment about the effectiveness of peaceful and nonviolent protests as the means for political change is also growing. 

Grim as they appear, these results are not surprising. In the grip of brutality at home, Iranians must undoubtedly feel forsaken by the international community which, despite their suffering, expresses a singular concern with Tehran: the nukes! The recent UN resolution and the murmur of a new rhetoric on the part of the State Department is only a fledgling voice that must yet to prove as genuine before it could be heard, or believed. Neither the EU nor the US has paid more than the occasional official lip service to fight the violations of human rights in Iran. Could it appear anything other than a grand riddle, if not a betrayal, to an average Iranian who sees the US invest billions in dollars and tens of thousands in uniformed men to install democracies in Iraq and Afghanistan while doing nothing to support Iran’s homegrown democratic movement that would cost America nothing?

The January earthquake in Haiti spurred one of the most glorious displays of global solidarity. The June 2009 political-quake in Iran has yet to do the same. What drives Americans to sport a yellow ribbon in the memory of soldiers fighting wars on behalf of democracy is all the logic necessary to drive them to wear a green wristband in the memory of those fighting the same war in Iran. But all this can only begin at home, in a White House that shows as much commitment to stopping Tehran’s nukes and its does to end its abuses.