The creature who once clutched papyrus in yellowed fingers, or fled through the caves of Aix-La-Chapelle, has come back to walk the stones of Tehran’s rumbling streets. Last week, cup in hand, the figure stalked these empty rows while the brim of his glass trembled, smoke rising from the ceramic base. In great scoops he swallowed the air, marked the ground, hands twitching, expecting. Neither God, nor fallen, he watched the cast ballots collect, raised his eyebrows at the counting, and danced in the pixelated smog of cell-phone videos. He is the Witness. The Shadow of Revolutions. And he, between all the burning stars and saints, answers to humans alone.
Tehran has erupted into masses of skin and hissing bullets—-showing no sign of abating. On Friday the 12th of 2009, two weeks ago, democratic elections were held throughout the country. Ahmadinejad, the incumbent, has held the presidential office since 2005. Throughout his presidency, he has worked to stabilize prices of goods, decrease the growing number of women in university through application of a 50-50 quota system, and increase resistance to the veto power of the U.N. He spoke openly againt furthering communication with the United States and Israel, and refuses to dissemble Iran’s nuclear program.
Economically, he has sought to find a balance between western-oriented capitalism and socialist policies, and in the process he has created the largest budget deficit since the revolution. However, Ahmadinejad has issued several controversial policies which seek to put economic power into the hands of Iran’s growing youth—most notably forcing tenured professors and scientists into retirement in order to make room for young professionals. When a financial plan which would provide assistance for young adults seeking to marry and buy homes in expensive urban centers was rejected in parliament, Ahmadinejad ordered the administrative council to execute the plan. On the other hand, human rights organizations have highlighted Ahmadinejad’s abuse of detainees in Evin Prison, and his open denial of the holocaust signaled a desire for increased political unrest between Islamic countries and Israel.
Mousavi, the more moderate candidate, participated extensively in protests during the Iranian revolution, and helped to establish the Islamic Republic in Iran in order to overthrow the monarchy. His left-wing political sway stood in stark contrast to the right-wing policies of Khameni in the early 1980′s, and when Khameni failed to gain approval for a right-wing prime minister, Mousavi was appointed instead. When the founder of the Islamic Republic died in the late 80′s, Mousavi found himself ousted out of politics by a conservative political regime, retreating into a political silence that would last 20 years. That is, until he declared his intent to run for the 2009 presidency in March, much to the surprise of the public and the leftist candidate who stepped aside for Mousavi’s voice.
In select socio-political areas, his platform offers a radical change from the direction of Iran’s government since the revolution. He campaigned on a platform of constitutional reform, demanding a dissemblage of the soley state-owned media companies, and most notably called for the military to be removed from the hands of the Supreme Leader and put into those of a democratically elected president. What Mousavi has proposed, in no uncertain terms, is a radical change to religious influence over politics in Iran—offering rights to women who have been harrassed by the so-termed “morality police”, and promising them financial opportunities so that they may serve in the highest roles of parliamentary bodies.
In other ways, however, Mousavi offers little change from Ahmadinejad. He does not seek to restructure the economy, but rather tweek existing endeavors to shelter the Iranian public from the effects of fluctuating oil prices. The most internationally controversial of Iran’s pursuits, that of nuclear power, is fully supported by Mousavi who has phrased it as an essential right for the people.
And yet, with political differences surprisingly moderate compared to genocidal allegations ringing in ears of the UN from contested elections elsewhere, tens of thousands–even hundreds of thousands—have risked their lives in recent days to challenge Ahmadinejad’s 11-million-vote win. The international press was effectively eliminated from Iran before the results even came in, with text messaging and cell-phones disabled, and escorted quietly to planes which would lift them away from an apparently expected civil clash. On June 13th, these expectations would be realized.
Ahmadinejad’s win came as a shock to students and workers in Iran’s capital. In groups numbering five and ten people, they took to the streets. Iranians have described it as an unplanned protest, but one that caught the cement roads like wildfire, until thousands found themselves chanting openly, setting fire to police vehicles, and demanding that their shouts be heard. As the Iranian police stormed the headquarters of the largest reform party, the Ayatollah urged protestors to find peace and accept the current regime. In a strong, throaty voice, the Ayatollah implored the people to look aside from the strife sewn by the disputed election, saying that protests “…question the election. If they continue (the consequences) will be their responsibility. … I’m asking my friends and brothers to follow the laws. Let God give us blessing to follow those ways.”
Unsurprisingly, the political call demanding disbandment of religiously-based authority responded with moral fervor of its own the next day—- “Death to the Dictator!” was the rising chant in the streets. And this chant continued, as internet access was tracked, cell-phones blocked, and a brave few continued to leak footage into mainstream online sites. Throughout the following week, the movement which seemed to be an unimportant dissent to the leading party only gained strength. Soon, the international community would see that the Ayatollah’s kard would merely give courage to the noble hydra of Iranians youthful revolution. As was expected, the raging heads silenced by Khamenei’s blade were real, and the names of the dead float eagerly on the people’s tongue.
Mowed down by automatic fire, the videos show affluent youth soaking in the blood of their comrades. A delicately lashed set of eyes—that is, the eyes of the revolution, embodied—-gaze into the lens of a cellphone from a face of pure olive skin, clean and lovely, lips painted and parted into into a smooth line. Her hajib, like origami, frames her and folds on a cement bed, and headless limbs grasp at her body in desperate, tense movements. As the movement around her raises to a fury, she stares, unblinking, into the viewers eyes. Her arm moves upward gently, as she seeks a hand from a crouched figure. Her expression is enigmatic, unpleading, relaxed. She looks as if, in looking, her last point is made. There is a glaring streak of revolution in her eyes, but not of violence and ash-strewn buildings, or make-shift hospitals set up in alleyways—it is the streak of revolution too often ignored but worshipped by the creature who roams these fertile valleys. It is the brush used to paint a witness. And as she calls to us to watch, unfaltering—unblinking—undone—her gentle face, that which once promised love trysts and university degrees, friendly chatter and executive decisions, is painted in thick, flowing, and endless streams of red from her parted lips and elegant nose.
Listen.
-
-
Since identified as Neda
