Ahmadinejad's Appeal

Joe: eepening divide between the president and a number of influential leaders, including some conservatives who belong to a faction that has supported Mr. Ahmadinejad.
.
Might these remarks have been intentional by Ahmadinejad to make him appear less conservative himself, and therefore to appeal to those thinking of supporting Mousavi?

It would be great if someone dubbed or subtitled the debate. I'd love to watch it.
.
I know the President has little influence on Iranian foreign policy, but an Ahmadinejad defeat would give Obama more flexibility to pursue better relations with Iran. Any chance Obama's Cairo speech is designed to help Mousavi? If I were an Iranian voter, I'd think it was worth considering Iran's international reputation because with Obama there is a real chance of improving things. That calculation would be different with Bush.

[...] Andrew Sullivan, Joe Klein at Swampland in Time: Mousavi made the sort of points that might register with a western audience: [...]

Joe, do you know anything about a little country in the Middle East named Lebanon? If you do, and if you're gonna talk about democracy in the region, Israel is not the only country to mention.

So it's NOT difficult to imagine another country in the Middle East, except Israel (and possibly Iraq), where this sort of public confrontation could take place. The country is called Lebanon. That country is far more democratic and free than Iran and Iraq, and in many ways more so than Israel.

[...] than even chance that the voters in Iran, from off of the state-controlled list of candidates, are about to give him the boot.  We may no longer have Ahmadinejad to kick around anymore.  Which does make perfect sense.  [...]

Joe,
You and Nazila Falthi of the NY Times pose a very good question: will anything change for the average Iranian if Mousavi is elected?
*
Consider first that all of Iran's candidates are hand selected by Iran's Guardian Council, comprised of Iran's aging Mullahs. In other words, Iran doesn't have primaries like we do in America. Instead, the ultra-Muslim clergy/heads of state give the people a small amount of candidates to choose from. http://aceproject.org/today/feature-articles/a-primer-on-iran2019s-presidential-election-system
These candidates, of course, represent the Guardian Council's various, but not ultra-different, viewpoints.
*
Second, Iran's post-1979 constitution dictates that many of the issues with which the US is concerned rest solely in the Supreme Leader's hands, if only not checked by a group of other mullahs in rarer circumstances. Iran's presidents, therefore, are no more than spokespeople for the ruling clergy.
*
Finally, in 1997 and 2001, the Iranians elected former president Khatami, who they thought would bring a social revolution to Iran. Instead, Khatami's impotence before the Mullahs and the Supreme Leader, Khamenei, disappointed many Iranians. A majority did not even show up to vote in 2005 because they quickly realized it did not matter who they voted for: the ultra-Arabist Talibani Mullahs would rule forever.
*
The Iranian presidential election will bring symbolic change for the people of Iran who want it, but in actuality, it is the Mullahs who are changing, not the President. Mousavi will present a nicer face for this change while Ahmadinejad will remain cautious and cynical -- a classic good cop/bad cop scenario.
*
Will it bring about change in the ways that the Iranians who vote for it want it? We have yet to see. As far as foreign policy is concerned, the Mullahs have already predetermined that bettering US relations is on the menu.
*
One final note, please tell your colleague, Nazila Falthi, to retract
her obvious mistranslation of Ahmadinejad's now infamous October 2005 speech where he was said to have stated that "Israel should be wiped off the map". As you know, this misquotation has been used world-wide as if it were fact that Ahmadinejad called for Iran to commit a Nazi-like genocide of Jews. Ahmadinejad was simply referring to Khomenei's criticism against the Israeli regime, or government, asking for its quick erasure from the pages of time. Of course, Iran's 25,000+ Jews aren't quivering about their Nazi President... that's because the quote is a lie. It's even been repeated on the pages of TIME Magazine. This is a matter of journalistic integrity. We are, of course, referring to the old gray lady... but you know what i mean

[...] is currently in Iran covering the election wrote about a “rock-em, sock-em presidential debate” just over a week ago. Klein's goal with this was clearly to present Iran as a modern Democracy where debates take place [...]

[...] is currently in Iran covering the election wrote about a “rock-em, sock-em presidential debate” just over a week ago. Klein's goal with this was clearly to present Iran as a modern Democracy where debates take place [...]

[...] Twelve days earlier, Klein more subtly made the Ahmadinejad/Bush connection in a comparison that favorably compared Iranian presidential candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi to Bush’s 2004 rival Sen. John Kerry (emphasis mine): But Ahmadinejad made the sharper, populist–if inaccurate–appeal: Mousavi represented the Tehran establishment, which was getting rich at the expense of average Iranians. He launched a direct attack on Hashemi Rafsanjani, whom he defeated in the 2005. This sort of attack is unprecedented in Iranian politics–and it may indicate desperation on Ahmadinejad’s part. He’s been trailing in recent polls. But it also may indicate why Ahmadinejad succeeded in 2005 and has been something less than a comfortable presence for the ruling Mullahs: he presents himself as an average guy, a populist, a man of faith–and a fighter. Mousavi, by contrast, is an artist and architect who allows his wife, a prominent academic, to sit next to him at campaign rallies.  [...]

[...] Twelve days earlier, Klein more subtly made the Ahmadinejad/Bush connection in a comparison that favorably compared Iranian presidential candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi to Bush’s 2004 rival Sen. John Kerry (emphasis mine): But Ahmadinejad made the sharper, populist–if inaccurate–appeal: Mousavi represented the Tehran establishment, which was getting rich at the expense of average Iranians. He launched a direct attack on Hashemi Rafsanjani, whom he defeated in the 2005. This sort of attack is unprecedented in Iranian politics–and it may indicate desperation on Ahmadinejad’s part. He’s been trailing in recent polls. But it also may indicate why Ahmadinejad succeeded in 2005 and has been something less than a comfortable presence for the ruling Mullahs: he presents himself as an average guy, a populist, a man of faith–and a fighter. Mousavi, by contrast, is an artist and architect who allows his wife, a prominent academic, to sit next to him at campaign rallies.  [...]

[...] Twelve days earlier, Klein more subtly made the Ahmadinejad/Bush connection in a comparison that favorably compared Iranian presidential candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi to Bush’s 2004 rival Sen. John Kerry (emphasis mine): But Ahmadinejad made the sharper, populist–if inaccurate–appeal: Mousavi represented the Tehran establishment, which was getting rich at the expense of average Iranians. He launched a direct attack on Hashemi Rafsanjani, whom he defeated in the 2005. This sort of attack is unprecedented in Iranian politics–and it may indicate desperation on Ahmadinejad’s part. He’s been trailing in recent polls. But it also may indicate why Ahmadinejad succeeded in 2005 and has been something less than a comfortable presence for the ruling Mullahs: he presents himself as an average guy, a populist, a man of faith–and a fighter. Mousavi, by contrast, is an artist and architect who allows his wife, a prominent academic, to sit next to him at campaign rallies.  [...]