Research Finds It May Be Too Late To Quell Iran Uprising
A think tank close to Iran's security council has concluded that protests over the years have become more serious and more frequent as grievances went unanswered.
A think tank close to Iran's security council has concluded that protests over the years have become more serious and more frequent as grievances went unanswered.
The research conducted by the National Security Monitor magazine for its September-October 2022 issue, says the current uprising is pluralist, has major objectives to change the bigger picture in Iran, is cyberspace-based, and does not seem to be backed by any institution.
The magazine is believed to be close to the Islamic Republic's Supreme National Security Council.
The research further found that collective reactions to events relating to the protests spread quickly although there seems to be no formal organization and leadership for the movement.
Other findings of the research include the fact that the uprising aims to bring about fundamental changes in Iran's political establishment, is backed by various layers of socio-political groups while also enjoying wholehearted support from the Iranian opposition abroad.
The government policy of suppressing protests by force and then failing to address the underlying problems has led to a worsening situation after each round of unrest and today, it might have become too late to come to peace with the disgruntled masses.
The study also found that although previously major protests occurred almost once in every decade [like the protests by the student movement in 1999 and the post-election unrest in 2009],during the past five or six years the interval between various protests have become shorter and they have occurred every one or two years. Soon, major protests may take place in Iran once in every two to three months, the study predicted.
The conclusions corroborate the attestations of individual social scientists and political activists who have generally attributed the protest in Iran to promises that have not been met for a long time and demands that have been ignored by several governments during the past 40 years.
Meanwhile the study also observed that the driving force behind the current movement are youngsters born after the second half of the 1990s. This part of the findings also corroborate with what Iranian sociologists and political activists have said or written during the past two months.
The main problem of the new generation appears to be lack of social freedoms within an Islamic system and general hopelessness about the future.
As this study and several Iranian sociologists have observed, the disillusioned new generation of Iranians is fed up with senseless and inefficient bureaucracy and at the same time does not believe in the outdated and meaningless ideology the Islamic Republic has been propagating during the past four decades.
Generally, according to this research, the current movement in Iran is marked by a generation gap, fluctuating at times between activism and mutiny, not being mainly about economic demands, changing mood between anger and hope, using opportunities provided by events, and a horizontal steering structure [lack of formal leadership].
Meanwhile, according to the study the way the Iranian government has been handling the protests have not changed during the past four decade. It is common knowledge that the government's first and only solution to any crisis like the current uprising is handling it violently. At times, such as during the protests against rising fuel prices in 2019, Iranian government forces have killed hundreds to silence uprisings. But this way of handling crises, coupled with failure to address systemic problems is only a temporary solution and protests flare up as soon as another event triggers a new round of protests. What triggered the current wave of protests in Iran was the murder of a young woman in mid-September while she was in morality police custody.
Two videos were posted on social media that showed thick green smoke wafting through the streets in Javanrud, a city of around 50,000 in the western province of Kermanshah, amid heavy clashes between stone-throwing protesters and security forces shooting at them. Reports also emerged on the same day of the use of a similar green gas in Piranshahr in West Azarbaijan Province.
The use of an unidentified gas that causes skin irritation, nausea and other symptoms has conjured up memories of Saddam Hussein’s chemical attack on the Kurdish border city of Sardasht, also in West Azarbaijan during Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) in the minds of many, particularly people in Iran's Kurdish areas.
Saddam’s chemical attack during which mustard gas was used killed at least 130 people and injured 8,000 of the 12,000 inhabitants of the city in 1983. Many victims still struggle with respiratory and other health issues.
“The occupying regime [of the Islamic Republic] is using banned weapons in Kordestan,” a tweet accompanied with an image of CS gas canisters allegedly found in Piranshahr said. The tweet also said CS gas has been banned by the UN Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) in 1993.
The canister is marked with the word “irritant” only, but posts shared on social media claim these are perceived as chemical weaponry that has been banned.
Iran's Kurdish cities have been at the forefront of the protests that started with the death is custody of the 22-year-old Mahsa Amini from the Kurdish city of Saqqez two months ago.
People in most Kurdish-populated areas in Kordestan, West Azarbaijan and Kermanshah provinces have relentlessly protested and defied government forces since Masha’s death. Security forces have killed and wounded dozens of protesters and bystanders including children in these provinces.
Some chemists and physicians have identified the green gas used in Javanrud and Piranshahr as hexachloroethane, others say it is adamsite (DM), a chemical used as a riot control agent.
Hexachloroethane has been used by the military in smoke compositions, such as smoke grenades worldwide. DM belongs to the group of chemical warfare agents known as vomiting agents or sneeze gases.
Most western countries have abandoned the use of smoke grenades but some activists have accused police of using it against protesters in Portland, Oregon, in 2020.
US-based physician Dr. Mohammad-Kazem Attari told Iran International Tuesday that hexachloroethane is used widely in military exercises in open air but unlike extremely toxic Sarin, VN and other nerve gases, it does not cause death or permanent disabilities.
According to Dr. Attari hexachloroethane can cause serious skin irritation, partial paralysis of facial muscles and fogginess of mind but temporarily. The chemical is also considered as a carcinogen.
“It is mainly used on the streets [for crowd control] to inspire fear due to its color. It is characterized as a nerve gas but is not as dangerous as nerve gases used in wars,” he said and added that the use of this gas is not likely to scare people who are not afraid of firearms used by Iranian regime forces.
Tear gas itself is banned in war according to UN’s Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) but its limited use is reportedly permitted for law enforcement purposes.
Yahya Rahim-Safavi, who is now military adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, reassured the nation that the unrest will come to end, however, he warned that it might not be the last one. He asked: "Cannot the IRGC and the Basij militia sort out what we are currently seeing in this country?" The general was talking about the violent uprising that has entered its third month.
Rahim-Safavi spoke on the same day that reformist commentator and political activist Hamid Reza Jalaeipour said: "Iran has not yet entered a revolutionary situation, but if the current unrest continues, the country will move toward a revolutionary phase."
This comes while many in Iran and abroad, including French President Emmanuel Macron have attested that the uprising in Iran has already turned into a revolution.
According to Ettela'at newspaper, Jalaeipour said that protesters in the streets of Iranian cities are demanding "structural changes," which is Iranian politicians' euphemism for "regime change." This is evident, he said in the slogans heard in the streets and at the universities.
He added that when society moves toward revolutionary conditions and governments try to stop the revolution, it means that those governments have already lost legitimacy, efficiency, and many other things.
He argued that in such societies the opposition has been successful in winning the protesters trust. However, Jalaeipour argued that protesters do not trust the Iranian opposition, without saying who that opposition is in his view.
It is possible that he mentioned lack of trust in opposition to protect himself against censure by the government. Self-censorship is an important tool for pundits in Iran who are quoted in government-controlled media.
The popular protests, however, have no known leaders, although some figures in the diaspora do appear as possible influencers, especially in a transition period.
Jalaeipour went on to say that around 80 percent of Iranians are unhappy with the government's performance, stressing that the current situation is worrying.
The commentator added that the bazaars in Tehran, Rasht and some other cities are on strike and if this continues and spreads to other cities, this means that part of the Iranian society that has been silent so far has been activated and is going toward a revolutionary situation.
Meanwhile, another reformist activist, Gholam Ali Rajaei has said that "A change in approach is in the interest of the government, the regime and the country." Rajai added: "It is getting late for a change."
Rajaei added: "So far there has been no sign to indicate that the message of the ongoing protests has been heard, and I think it is getting late for that."
Other analysts have maintained that it is Khamenei who has to listen to the solutions politicians offer for Iran's problems. Nonetheless, pundits like Rajaei shy away from naming Khamenei or simply fear the repercussions.
Rajaei added: "I even doubt that the government [Khamenei] would even bother to read the message of reconciliation." He reiterated that "reforms are the best solution but not the kind of reforms advocated by political parties." Once again, Rajaei stopped short of naming Khamenei as the individual who should listen to the people and change his autocratic way of running the country.
In the meantime, most of the insulting slogans chanted in the streets call for Khamenei's removal.