For what it's worth

Although not an expert on the subject I have long been interested in Iran and have been following the coverage of the demonstrations in that country throughout the day. A few thoughts:

• There is both anecdotal and statistical evidence that suggests the election was stolen, and I am inclined to believe that it was.

• It is jarring -- in a very pleasant way -- to see video of thousands of Iranians chanting "Marg bar diktator!" (death to the dictator) instead of "Marg bar Amrika!"

• I suspect that these demonstrations are about much more than the election. Iran, it should be remembered, is not a true democracy, with candidates requiring approval of the religious Council of Guardians. I think rather than the stealing of the election has provided an opportunity for many people to air a range of grievances about the current state of the country. The fact that the religious establishment felt the need to steal an election for which it had already tilted the playing field has to provoke a lot of anger.
  

• Those leading the demonstrations seem to be fairly pro-Western and savvy with technologies such as youtube and twitter. Many Iranians, of course, have direct experience with the West, including family members that live in the U.S. and other countries and exposure to Western ideas. This strikes me as further evidence of the need to promote engagement with these countries, at least on a societal and economic level, rather than silly embargoes and other hollow gestures that promote isolation.

• This seems to have some real implications for the media. While I am not one who celebrates the current struggles of newspapers and various media outlets I also do not believe that their decline signifies the apocalypse either. I think in the future news will increasingly be reported by citizen journalists -- essentially amateurs armed with digital cameras and internet access. Some of the video coming out of Iran is pretty impressive. Bloggers will aggregate this and spin it into various narratives. Contrast what is occuring in Iran with the reporting out of Baghdad in the 1991 Gulf War when CNN and Peter Arnett were pretty much the only person with access to events inside the country.

• Twenty years ago there were high-profile revolutions in Romania and China. Both times the security forces played decisive roles in determining the outcome. I have read that the police and Iranian military have remained neutral thus far -- let's see if that changes.

Update: Maybe the election was not stolen?

Update: George Friedman agrees that Ahmadinejad is the legitimate winner and points out that Iran remains "a country that is poor, pious and content on the whole with the revolution forged 30 years ago." That's probably true. The people with computers, cameras and access to the internet who are the face of the revolution are probably not a representative slice of Iranian society.