Iran election results irrelevant - A Revolution is Approaching

Whether Ahmadinejad’s “victory” is legitimate or not is inconsequential. It’s easy for some to look at the Iran election results with a mindset that the United States should intervene for the advancement of democratic ideals. But the truth of the matter is, the situation in Iran is a symbolic transition that we should not interfere with. The election, or “selection”, is over.

Yes, it is clear the likeliness of Ahmadinejad’s victory being an accurate reflection of democracy is slim. However, rather than focusing on demanding another recount for the Iranian people, we need to understand a fraudulent election is not the end-all for the people of Iran. In fact, this is the beginning of what is sure to be a time of historical change.

But in no way does this excuse the horrific acts of violence being used to quell the opposition. In fact, I was glad to see President Obama take a stand against these actions. More importantly, I agree with his statement that, “This is about the people of Iran and the future that they, and only they, will choose.”

While we should support the people of Iran and call for the ethical treatment of Iranian and international protesters, we do not need to intervene in a way that could end up landing us in another Iraq War.

As the Iranian government continues to repress demonstrations, the will of the people remains strong. While many consider the election results a loss, one reporter called the aftermath “an incalculable political and moral victory.”

The Iran of today is much different than the Iran that was established as a result of the Islamic Revolution. Today, with 70 percent of Iran’s population under age 30, the impending paradigm shift has begun to surface. As two generations of Iranians fight to defend their values and beliefs against one another, it is becoming increasingly difficult for the regime to maintain support among its people.

While this may come as a surprise to some, others argue reform has been brewing for quite some time. In fact, Elaine Sciolino of the New York Times offered deep insight into the changing Iranian culture with her book, Persian Mirrors: The Elusive Face of Iran, after spending two decades recording the deep inner-workings of a very complicated country.

“Iran is not a place that can be repressed forever,” wrote Sciolino. “The conservative’s grip on power may be greater than it has in years. But its control over the minds of its people is not so strong.”

It seems as though Sciolino’s words hold even stronger in the face of Iran’s recent political unrest. It is clear the Iranian government’s grip on society is slipping. As the future of this country continues to unfold, it is important we stand by as supporters of democracy— but not as interveners.

What do you think? Should the U.S. take stronger actions to combat the controversial actions of the Iranian government? Or, should we let the Iranian people determine their own future?