|
 Iranian Elections and Funding the War - “Something happening here, What it is ain’t exactly clear.” - Stephen Stills.
There is something happening on the international stage, in the cafes of Lebanon and shops of Tehran, in the halls of congress and in the spirit of the American people. The winds of resistance are blowing, the people are rising up and the wheels of change are slowly turning.
There is a voice rising from the Iranian people that to the naked eye seems unpolluted by the manipulations of intelligence agencies, a genuine desire for a new beginning, a yearning for democratic reform and a new vision of Iran’s place in the global community.
There is an irony in the American government joining the democratic world in sounding a protest of the Iranian elections. Our own elections have often come under question, including two of our last three presidential elections. In 2000 a massive disenfranchisement campaign combined with electoral irregularities in Florida altered the outcome and shaped the course of history. In 2004 America denied access to international observers. It was one of the early signs that a fix was in. In fact everywhere America’s electronic voting systems [1] have come into play, such as the recent elections in Mexico, there remains a stain of potential election fraud.
It is in fact a foregone conclusion that political parties will cheat if they are allowed to cheat whether it is in Europe or America or the Middle East. It is also clear that the people can smell a cheat and it will only fuel the fires of opposition. If what we are seeing in the streets of Tehran and in the elections in Lebanon is real and pervasive then a powerful wave of democratic change is sweeping through the region. It is not the brute force of military might that is pushing this wave but the promise of peace through diplomacy (though that promise may be more illusion than reality).
Political change does not happen overnight. Political institutions will always resist. But in the breadth of history with the inevitability of time the will of the people if sustained will always prevail.
We can no more be sure of what is happening in Iran and throughout the Middle East than we can about our own government’s willingness to end America’s wars. We do know that when the people are given a clear and simple choice, no matter where they lie on the political spectrum, no matter how they stand on the wars themselves, in a struggling economy they would rather spend billions at home rebuilding our own country and putting our people to work than in continuing our foreign occupations.
As it is in Tehran so it is in Washington.
Whispers traveling the halls of congress gave rise to rumors that we could end the current wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in the same way we ended the war in Vietnam. When it comes right down to it neither the libertarian right nor the Blue Dog Democrats nor the antiwar progressives can justify voting to appropriate billions and billions more to destruction in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan when our own citizens are losing jobs and homes and the ability to sustain a decent life. When it comes right down to it elected officials of all stripes do not want to campaign for re-election on the promise of spending more on unnecessary foreign wars when our needs at home are so severe.
It is easy to dismiss the claim on some political wires (Democrats.com, Voters for Peace, Progressive Democrats of America) that we stood only 3-5 votes away from ending the wars by defeating a supplemental war appropriations bill but it is difficult to deny that something is happening. A candle is lit and the way forward is illuminated. Yesterday’s impossible is suddenly in play.
Congress will inevitably end the war by refusing to fund it. Congress must do so because it is closest to the people and the people will insist. We have not yet fully appreciated the depth and breadth of our economic struggles. It will not be a quick recovery. There will not be a return to normal any time soon. There will be high unemployment, a continued erosion of wages and benefits, a tightening of credit to fend off inflation, defaulting state and local governments, school closures and a host of other financial difficulties we have only begun to endure.
We will end the war when disparate individuals and organizations come together on one simple truth: We need the money at home.
Yes we will have to invest in rebuilding what we have caused to be destroyed but we need not invest in continued destruction. This one supplemental funding bill will cost every family in the nation over $900. It may be argued that it is not a significant amount until we realize that this appropriation will be followed by another and another with no end in sight. We may disagree on how that money should be spent, whether to reduce the debt or to put our citizens back to work, but we can all agree that the money should be spent at home.
In the words of Representative Denis Kucinich of Ohio:
“The truth is, we should not have prosecuted the war against the Iraqi people. The truth is the Democratic Senate could have stopped the Iraq war in 2002. The truth is we Democrats were given control of Congress in 2006 to end the war. The truth is, this bill continues a disastrous war [that] has cost the lives of thousands of our soldiers [and countless innocent civilians]. The truth is, the occupation has fueled the insurgency. The truth is, the Iraq war will cost the American and the Iraqi people trillions of dollars. Get out of Iraq. Get out of Afghanistan. Come home, America. Come home.”
This is what’s happening here. The people everywhere are slowly awakening to cold hard realities. The power of popular will is pushing the wheels of change. In Iran as in America the challenge is daunting but the effect is unavoidable.
In Iraq as in Afghanistan as in Pakistan as in Iran and America, the government can fight back the tide of popular will and the force of history only so long.
[1] In 2007 Premier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold) was caught hacking web source Wikipedia to remove criticisms (including fundraising by CEO Walden O’Dell for George W. Bush) and allegations of electronic vote rigging. Premier Election Solutions is a small subsidiary to Diebold, accounting for only 2.4% of gross revenues, but it is arguably the most powerful and influential subsidiary in the world. Diebold is to electoral democracy what Blackwater is to security: a dark power so diabolic it is forced to change its name periodically.
Image Courtesy of DayLife - An Iranian man protests against the presidential elections in Iran on June 12, 2009 outside a polling booth for the local Iranian community in Los Angeles. US President Barack Obama held out the "possibility of change" in US-Iran ties, but his administration insisted Tehran halt its sensitive nuclear work no matter who wins the elections there. Obama spoke of such a possibility whether the election is won by incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who is seeking a second four-year term, or by reformist former premier Mir Hossein Mousavi. - Getty Images 4 days ago.
 |
Columnists 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Thank you for always making me laugh.
