Iran | 16.06.2009

German press review: Iran's election protests

Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Iran's protestors have forced their way into the world's consciousness

Mass demonstrations in Tehran over Iran's disputed presidential election results have dominated world headlines. What do the German newspapers have to say?

"Old revolutionaries know when revolutions threaten to reach critical mass," writes center-right daily Die Welt, dismissing Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's call for a recount as a play for time. It goes on to remind readers that "since the Islamic revolution, democratic conditions have never really been present" in Iran. The clerical leadership hand picked candidates it believed would toe its line. The crass nature of the regime's alleged power grab - "it seems their real leaders decided that 95 percent control was not enough – they wanted it all" - means that now many Iranians "don't want to put up with it any longer."

In left-leaning Die Tageszeitung, prominent German-Iranian writer Bahmand Nirumand writes that the big loser thus far has been Khamenei, because "everyone in Iran understands that...an election could not be falsified without his say-so." And if the Council of Guardians-sponsored recount concluded that the results were in fact fixed, "Khamenei would be ruined. He went before the people earlier than was necessary to congratulate Ahmadinejad on his 24 million votes – even naming the number."

"The world has learned one thing: a little democracy can be enough, over time, to topple any regime," writes the mass circulation tabloid BILD. The paper also frames the conflict within its readers' life experience. "The images of demonstrating students that emerged from Tehran on Monday reminded us in Europe of the scenes of 20 years ago," writes Bild, "in which one dictator after another fell under the weight of the masses."

The right-leaning Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, however, strikes a note of caution to democratic triumphalists. It says that Iran has perhaps "entered a new phase of political disquiet, one in which the relationship between the state security apparatus and the religious powers will end up at a new point of balance." The paper goes on to say that condemnation of the violent attacks on Mousavi supporters is a given, but it might be that the economic and intellectual elites of Iran are revolting against the poor and religious masses - and that the west should get out of the way in any case.

"First, because nobody really knows what this Mousavi really stands for in the realm of foreign policy. And there is some doubt as to whether he would change much – or be able to, in any case. Second, too much foreign sympathy for Mousavi would be used as grist for the hardliners' mill in a campaign to discredit him as a western puppet. Third, because there just isn't much chance, nor apparently much interest on the part of Iranians, for outsiders to steer the proceedings there. It's evident from the last few days of protest that Iran is a sham democracy, and that a lot of Iranians want more than a farce election."

mrh
Editor: Jennifer Abramsohn

dw