Last week, the people of Iran went to the voting booth to elect their president.  The top two candidates were: the fiery, ultra-conservative incumbent Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, and the somewhat reformist Mir Hussen Mousavi.  Although there were no trustworthy polls taken right before the election, it was thought that the race was somewhat close, and there were predictions that, at the very least, neither candidate would get more than 50% of the votes, and there would have to be a run-off election.

So alarm bells went off in the minds of many when the Iranian election commission announced that not only had Ahmedinejad won, but that he had done so by a margin of nearly 30% of the votes!

We should mention at this point that the government of Iran is not democratic in the sense that we in the West might understand the term.  Iran is a theocracy, an “Islamic republic”.  While the citizens do elect a president, the president is under the supervision of the Supreme Leader, the highest political and religious figure in the nation.  And the Supreme Leader also appoints a council which uses religious rules to decide who can and cannot run for president.  The Supreme Leader and this presidential council are extremely conservative and traditional in their views on political and social issues, which puts the government into tension with its citizens, who are largely more modern and moderate.

So despite significant restrictions on their freedom to assemble and their freedoms of speech, both Mousavi supporters and Iranians who felt that the elections results seemed shady, took to the streets to call for justice.  This is extremely dangerous to do in Iran, where the government and its allies will go to great and oppressive lengths to suppress dissent and maintain control.

To be honest, none of us really know who won this election.  We’ve seen some persuasive arguments about why one candidate should have won and why the other lost, and we’re inclined to agree with the folks who think that the election was stolen.  But we don’t know.

So what do we do?  As people who believe in freedom and self-determination, we shouldn’t look to our own goals, but ways that we could support the goals of the people of Iran.  At present, the Iranian people look to be taking their own actions in their own ways, but are finding themselves blocked by censorship and government violence.  So we can try to support their desire for free communication, free media, and an end to repression and brutality.  Amnesty International has this campaign calling for an end to the brutality and barriers to free communication.  There may also be ways that tech-savvy people can help Iranians bypass these barriers, and we can all help spread the stories that the Iranian government wants to keep secret.

Many American activists go with their immediate instincts and want to have protests in the streets in favor of the less-dictatorial candidate, or put pressure on the White House to speak out against Ahmedinejad and the Iranian government.  But we have to be careful in this regard; Iran has plenty of reason to be suspicious of US intentions; they do not easily forget that the US overthrew their democratically-elected government in the 1950s (and helped install and support the ruthless Shah Pahlavi for decades), nor that the US has frequently tried to manipulate the politics of the Middle East region.  Intense American actions supporting either side of this Iranian conflict could look like yet another attempt to control Iran for American benefit.  So we think that careful, considered action should be taken, all the while listening closely for input and requests from the Iranian people.

Everyone keep your eyes and ears open, and we’ll do our best to help keep you informed.