The Foreign Service Journal, July-August 2010

independent monitors to verify the re- sults. As Iranian democracy and hu- man rights advocate Mariam Memar- sadeghi told a Washington, D.C., audi- ence on July 29, 2009: “We want to focus on the unfree election; that is what is galvanizing us.” The opposition clearly understood that its perform- ance at the ballot box had undermined the regime’s legitimacy. The Iranian authorities tried to stop the erosion of their legitimacy early on by offering to set up a committee to conduct a limited review of the elec- tion. Mir Hossein Moussavi and the other opposition presidential candi- dates, along with the former speaker of Parliament, Mehdi Karroubi, all re- jected the offer on the grounds that the government was not trustworthy; no one would believe its investigation of ir- regularities without independent mon- itoring. That is why, when Iranian human rights activist and Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi demanded an election rerun, she coupled it with a demand that it be done under the su- pervision of the United Nations. Though public discussion of the election is no longer tolerated, Kha- menei has kept the focus on the process by accusing foreigners of trying to ma- nipulate the election’s outcome in order to mobilize support. The opposition has responded bravely to dire warnings from the regime, taking to the streets on Nov. 4, 2009, the 30th anniversary of the takeover of the U.S. embassy in Tehran. (Instead of “Death to Amer- ica” banners, the protesters held up anti-Russian placards becauseMoscow had recognized Ahmadinejad’s re-elec- tion.) Tens of thousands of Iranians also turned out for the funeral of dissi- dent cleric Grand AyatollahHossein Ali Montezeri on Dec. 21, and at least four demonstrators were killed six days later, on the religious holiday of Ashura. In January, Mehdi Karroubi said, “The more we go ahead, the more I’m convinced the election was massively rigged.” In a meeting with supporters that was reported in the Jan. 26 Los Angeles Times , he added: “I say it firmly that I’ll never compromise on the nation’s rights, notably the votes they cast in the ballot boxes. I’ll stand by the nation up to the end, and I’ll try my best to remove the hurdles to a free and fair election.” On March 20, in an Iranian New Year message, Mir Hossein Moussavi praised those who had died in post- election unrest. “We lack free elec- tions, where candidates are not cherry- picked, and fair competition.” But he also broadened his criticism to eco- nomic issues, promising that “the com- ing year will be known as the year of persistence.” It is already impossible to imagine Khamenei and Ahmadinejad even at- tempting to portray a future election as entitled to international recognition as an expression of Islamic virtue. In- deed, it is hard to overestimate how far downhill the Iranian regime has slid in terms of democratic expectations. Be- fore the June elections, Tehran was seen as attempting to incorporate democratic elements into the process; the campaign even saw an American- style TV debate between candidates Ahmadinejad and Moussavi. NowWashington’s judgment on the situation matches that of opposition forces within Iran. Speaking to uni- versity students in Qatar in February, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton warned that Iran’s Revolu- tionary Guard wielded so much power that it was effectively supplanting the government, “moving toward a mili- tary dictatorship.” The regime is in- creasingly isolated. Most dramatically, Beijing can no longer be counted on to remain in Iran’s camp. On May 18 China joined Russia, the U.S. and Europe in calling for sanctions against Iran. Beijing’s de- cision concerns Tehran’s nuclear pro- gram, but that does not detract from its significance for Iran’s overall interna- tional legitimacy. Grounds for Hope Despite the success of the regime in silencing nighttime shouts of “death to the dictator,” the Iranian elections have highlighted the fact that people want their votes honestly counted in a process that meets international stan- dards. Credible elections are a part of the universal striving for dignity Presi- dent Barack Obama talks about; as such, they constitute the opposite of “imposing democracy.” Supporting international standards, it turns out, is a way to get around the problem of dictators blaming foreign- ers for threats to their power. It is not imperialism if prominent Iranians like Shirin Ebadi demand that any rerun of the Iranian elections occur under United Nations supervision. Dodging the imperialist label will still be difficult, to be sure, especially when the West seeks to reverse dem- ocratic backsliding in former colonies, such as in Africa. But if cases of diffi- cult elections where the international community perseveres in pushing local governments to meet interna- tional standards multiply — the trend will accelerate. In his 2007 book, Second Chance , former National Security Adviser Zbig- 46 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / J U LY- A U G U S T 2 0 1 0 When Iranian human rights activist Shirin Ebadi demanded an election rerun, she stipulated that it be done under the supervision of the United Nations.