Western media’s disgraced and hopeless campaign against Iran
Posted on June 14th, 2009

Ajit Randeniya

The Western media’s campaign during the lead up to the just concluded election provides a case study in the study of how their oligopoly collude to destabilise countries to implement “ƒ”¹…”regime change’ through criminal and underhand means.

For an independent observer, or anyone who has followed Iranian affairs from the pre-Shah era to the present, it was obvious that the incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was immensely popular in the country: he represented the Iranian mindset of a generation born in to the events following the British ‘hush hush’  invasion of Iran in 1918.

In 1921, the British installed an illiterate Cossack military officer named Reza Khan as the shah of Persia. The shah brutality started back then while the British plundered the oil wealth of Iran, excluding even the US cousins from action! Reza Shah was in power until 1941 when Britain and Russia forced him out in favour of his son, the disgraced Mohammed Reza Pahlevi who was chased out by the Iranians in 1979.

But the event that crystallised the most anti-Western sentiment in Iran was the toppling of the elected government of Mohammad Mosaddeq in 1953, through a joint UK and US (CIA) plot  known as “Operation Ajax“.  It was the hatred of the West rooted in the criminality and dishonesty of these events the Iranians expressed in 1979, including through the US hostage taking.

President Ahmadinejad’s refusal to abandon his country’s legal right to develop nuclear energy struck a note with most Iranians due to this historical background, and he was never going to loose an election after four years of “ƒ”¹…”squaring-up to’ the West’s bullying. This is the reason why the BBC, Reuters, AP, AFP oligopoly decided to attempt a surreptitious, lie-based  campaign to “ƒ”¹…”alter perception’ within and outside Iran.

The campaign tried in the case of Iran is based on similar successful campaigns in places such as Georgia and Ukrain: according to the “ƒ”¹…”model’, contestants with nationalistic, patriotic or anti-imperialist inclinations are portrayed as “ƒ”¹…”bad’ people who rig elections, and can’t be trusted. Western stooges however,  are portrayed as embodiment of virtue, who are up-against it because of the power imbalance; the reality is that local people reject them a la Ranil Wickremesinghe of Sri lanka.

The plot is based on a pre-election warm-up of stories about a “a tight contest”: the inevitable rejection of the stooges by the local community is then followed by cries of foul play and complaints of vote rigging. Then come the “ƒ”¹…”peaceful protests’ in city squares, government buildings and other public places. The numbers of protesters usually do not reflect the claimed “ƒ”¹…”immense popularity’ of the loosing side, but enough to create trouble for the winners; the objectie here is to provoke the government and its forces to action that is required to maintain law and order. These provide good “ƒ”¹…”photo opportunities’ of the use of water cannons, tear gas and rubber bullets that could be captured to back up charges of “ƒ”¹…”human rights violations’.

The Western media campaign that gathered momentum during the last two to three weeks of the Iranian election was based on this model: a sudden (almost miraculous) rise of popularity of the so-called “Iranian reform movement“, and the challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi seemed to have occurred in the last week. The previously “ƒ”¹…”also ran’  Mousavi was suddenly found to have “­galvanised an apathetic electorate and had been widely expected to trounce the “ƒ”¹…”controversial’ incumbent, or “ƒ”¹…”at least’ do well enough to trigger a run-off”.  Such disingenuous reporting was based more on hope than reality!

The Iranian people seemed to have suddenly developed a craving for “more liberty at home as well as better relations abroad”. The hope for detente on the nuclear issue, the Middle East and relations with the US in particular! Signs of “ƒ”¹…”revolution’ or open rebellion were also reported with stories of Mousavi supporters jamming Tehran traffic for hours at night during the last week, and women “ƒ”¹…”relaxing’ their head covers and young men dancing in the street.

When the elections were held on Saturday however, the staggering result was that President Ahmadinejad had won a crushing victory of 65% to 35%. The Western plot does not seem to have worked!

All the “usual suspects” were quite generous in coming out with their “uninvited” comments and analyses: Hillary Clinton refused to accept Ahmadinejad’s victory, and hoped the outcome reflected the “genuine will and desire” of Iranian voters; David Miliband said concerns about ballot counting that candidates have expressed are an issue for Iranian authorities to address; Bernard Kouchner told reporters his government is “very worried” about the situation in Iran; EU criticised the conduct of elections and their “brutal” reaction against demonstrators.

Then came the analysts from such esteemed “think-tanks” as the Rand Corporation and the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) in London were trying to “ƒ”¹…”read’ this result: the Rand “ƒ”¹…”expert’ conceded that “Ahmadinejad has of course won the election”.  But declared that “the opposition may protest this election as being fraudulent”! The IISS “ƒ”¹…”expert’ was convinced that “the hardliners in the regime have exercised all their levers of power to keep Ahmadinejad in place”. Elliott Abrams, a leading neocon from The Council on Foreign Relations, whose agenda is to discourage Barack Obama from becoming friendly towards Iran said: “Both the apparent victory and the apparent fraud greatly complicate the Obama strategy. My advice is that they had better be thinking about more sanctions”. Israel quickly demanded efforts to stop Iran acquiring nuclear weapons.

No surprises there!

In the meantime, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) broke their dignified silence on the drama with a warning that any attempt at a popular “revolution” would be crushed.

Riot police gathered around key government buildings, and mobile phone text messaging was blocked. International news websites “”…” including the Guardian and the BBC “”…” as well as pro-Mousavi websites were blocked or difficult to access.

The world is fully awake!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 


Copyright © 2021 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress