I have a detailed review for you of the 22 June article by George Friedman written for STRATOR’s Geopolitical Weekly report, entitled “The Iranian Election and the Revolution Test.” Today and in the next several blogs, I will answer its points step by step like I often do with some of your more interesting letters and comments.
In this way, I want to give you the “prophetic angle” to the STRATFOR take on Iran’s election and why the Green Revolution of disgruntled Mousavi voters does not pass the test for success for now.
I invite you to browse STRATFOR’s website at: www.stratfor.com
Now to George Friedman’s article (in blue) and my comments:
We will examine this article in four blogs that should be posted one day at a time, unless North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il tries to poker a wager that he has balls and forces an interruption requiring my crystal ballsy reply. Please note that I came across this STRATFOR article long after my predictions where visualized. I find it intriguing how much what I gathered from psychic intelligence matched George Friedman’s objective intelligence report.
Successful revolutions have three phases. First, a strategically located single or limited segment of society begins vocally to express resentment, asserting itself in the streets of a major city, usually the capital. This segment is joined by other segments in the city and by segments elsewhere as the demonstration spreads to other cities and becomes more assertive, disruptive and potentially violent. As resistance to the regime spreads, the regime deploys its military and security forces. These forces, drawn from resisting social segments and isolated from the rest of society, turn on the regime, and stop following the regime’s orders. This is what happened to the Shah of Iran in 1979; it is also what happened in Russia in 1917 or in Romania in 1989.
When the demonstrations began, I was guided to look carefully at the flurry of jerky amateur movies and photos pouring out of Iran for signs the Western reporters miss, either because they are well paid to be lazy or they are instructed by their handlers not to comment. I wish to share these insights so you might be armed with more awareness as a citizen journalist, because soon, that’s the only kind of journalism that will be left to us.
Look at the crowds in the pictures throughout the historic week of defiant street demonstrations following the 12 June presidential elections. You will find them mostly thronged by young, college-student aged, well dressed, upscale demonstrators. You will find that nearly all the Iranian twitter’s come from English majors. Even martyred Neda Soltan, made famous by her cell phone taped death by sniper fire, was a student, chaperoned by either an older male member of her family as is custom in Islamic countries or it is her university teacher. He’s the one crying out her name, telling her to hang on as she expired, staring at the cell phone camera.
One thing I did not see: people dressed like the working class. I did not see the kind of people assembled and dressed like those sitting in Qom, on June 20, one week after the election taking in the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei’s notorious Friday Prayer “crackdown” speech. If I had seen such serried ranks of young bearded men in austere, downscale clothing, (Ahmadinejad clones) side by side with the demonstrators, I might have believed there would be a different outcome than my oracle had already described. I was certainly biased towards making the oracle wrong. However, there was a reality the news media did not, or would not countenance. This was a rebellion, as Friedman later reported of one social group and as long as they remained isolated what he says in the following passage was their fate:
Revolutions fail when no one joins the initial segment, meaning the initial demonstrators are the ones who find themselves socially isolated. When the demonstrations do not spread to other cities, the demonstrations either peter out or the regime brings in the security and military forces — who remain loyal to the regime and frequently personally hostile to the demonstrators — and use force to suppress the rising to the extent necessary. This is what happened in Tiananmen Square in China: The students who rose up were not joined by others. Military forces who were not only loyal to the regime but hostile to the students were brought in, and the students were crushed.
I scowered You Tube for signs of a wider revolution. I watched right and left leaning US media from Fox to CNN for images that supported their revolution-is-spreading hype, only once seeing a cell phone demonstrations held outside of the familiar streets of northern and central Teheran. At last they broadcast a rather modest protest of a 100 or so gathered in a square in Esfahan. Again, they were dressed like and appeared to be like members of the upscale, student classes in Teheran.
Hard facts vindicate the oracle’s intuition. If this were a popular, nationwide revolution, as the news agencies in the West still try to peddle, there would not be the ruthless crackdown, ongoing. The masses in the streets of Teheran and other cities around Iran would multiply, filled with the ranks of the working class, the poor, the clerics and finally students would be seen on our TVs marching shoulder to shoulder with the same motorcycle driving, club swinging Revolutionary Guards that chased them down streets in the early days of the rebellion.
It is not happening. This revolution, for all of its merits, is not happening, Fox News. It is not happening, CNN. It is not sustainable MSNBC.
The darker tendency in a 36-year cycle Ying cycle started since 2008 is a populace, and for that matter a news media, under the influence of sentiment over sentience, easily carried away into waves of emotional hysterics.
Sentiment dominates sentience.
This is the future danger we will all have to understand and transcend up unto the start of the next 36-year “Yang” cycle in the year 2044.
(06 July 2009)