The Mistake of Ayatollah Khamenei

by iBerk

Yesterday, Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, expressed what amounted to a full endorsement of incumbent president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He could have, in effect, caused his own downfall and possibly a revolution in his country.

The results of Iran's June 12 election are indeed questionable. Many experts Iranian experts have pointed to various statistical anomalies in the polling, for instance that the primary opposition leader, Mir-Hossein Mousavi did not win in the two Azeri provinces in which he was expected to do well. However, regardless of whether the election was "fair", there is still a high level of discontent among the Iranian population, particularly in Tehran. It may never be proven whether the election that occurred on the 12th was, in fact, fraudulent, however the fact remains that a seemingly large portion of the Iranian population believes it to be so. Therefore, the Ayatollah made a huge mistake by ignoring this segment of the population and banning all further demonstrations.

Khamenei, as the Supreme Leader of Iran enjoys enormous power. He has no chance of being impeached, or removed from office, and his position is not elected. Therefore, he is virtually politically immortal. However, any leader, regardless of their vulnerability, only has as much power as afforded to them by their people. As a religious as well as political leader, the Ayatollah most likely enjoyed unlimited power, his word was law. However, by systematically banning all opposition to the elections, and therefore to Ahmadinejad's rule, he effectively lost the obedience of a large portion of the population. Individuals who once would not think of disobeying the Ayatollah's command could now be quite open to questioning him. This is because of the 'black and white' terms of his decision to support Ahmadinejad.

By stating that any demonstrations, even peaceful ones, would be violently suppressed, and hereby effectively banning any and all opposition to the Ahmadinejad's rule, the Ayatollah has, I believe, alienated this faction who still believes in the victory of Mousavi. As the continued demonstrations have shown, many of these individuals have shown themselves to be willing to act against the will of the Khamenei. As violence continues, and discontentment continues to rise, it is likely that more individuals will make this choice.

Therefore, the Ayatollah has fundamentally undermined his power base. By creating the substrate for the questioning of his own power, he has perhaps begun the process of his own downfall. It is impossible to predict what will occur in Iran in the coming days weeks or months, however it seems clear that, at the present rate something drastic is likely to occur. Perhaps an event such as the arrest of Mousavi will be the catalyst for an event as extreme as a revolution. Or, perhaps the demonstrations will eventually die down in magnitude, and the Ahmedinejad regime will continue its reign unimpeded for the next 5 years. Whatever happens, however, it is clear that the fundamental balance of power in the Middle East, or even for the entire world, is at stake and could change at any time.

Read more!

Obama's Cairo Speech

by The Young Sentinel

Read more!

Sotomayor: Activism and Empathy, Oh My!

by Kakofonous

President Obama's nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court of the United States came as no surprise to observers of the legal political scene in Washington. She has an impeccable resumé: Sotomayor graduated cum laude from Princeton, then went to Yale Law where she edited the Yale Law Review. She later served in judging positions, having been appointed both by George Bush, Sr. and Bill Clinton. Her personal history, involving a move from the Bronx housing projects to Princeton and a relatively high-profile career in law, is pitch-perfect from a political standpoint (if confirmed, she would be the first Latina, and third woman, on the Court), appealing to the Hispanic voting bloc, which is still well in play for the 2010 and 2012 elections. At the moment, the major Republican talking point against liberal judges (or, more accurately, judges appointed by Democratic presidents, as Sotomayor is widely perceived as a centrist) is the supposedly unfortunate predeliction for "empathy", which, apparently, is code for "activist judge". While Sotomayor may not be a raging leftist, she is certainly fair game for the activist charge, as this widely circulated YouTube clip reveals, it is puzzling to me why empathy is such a terrible quality in a judge.

Of course, the law should not be bent or circumvented in favor of one party in a case over another. But the very reason we have the hierarchical court system we do is that some cases are more difficult than others to resolve. Law needs interpretation to become justice; it seems to me that empathy is a good a quality as any for a reasoned judge to have in the courtroom. To understand the circumstances from which a party came, to possess as near a holistic understanding of the case as possible before reaching a verdict, is an essential quality in a court of law. I do not suggest that empathy in a judge should interfere with impartiality, but merely that it should form part of a doubtlessly difficult decision.

Here's a link to an article from Slate about empathy in a judicial setting.

Read more!

A Quick Note on the UN Human Rights Council

by Eyck Freymann

Vaclav Havel, the former President of the Czech Republic, penned an op-ed in the New York Times yesterday criticizing the UN Human Rights Council. Titling the piece "A Table for Tyrants," Havel stated the obvious: that the nations that monitor human rights abuses should not have histories of committing them themselves.

Today, Al Jazeera reports that Saudi Arabia, China, Russia, and Cuba were among the 47 nations chosen. The United States also won a seat after eight years of boycott under Bush.

I find it farcical in the extreme, and perilous to every individual whose human rights have been compromised in these countries. Quis custos custodiet? Who will guard the guards?

Read more!