Doomed Iranian Students

In 1989 there were two revolutions – one in Tianamen Square which failed miserably and one in Eastern Europe that resulted in the demise of the Berlin Wall and the Communist regime in Russia. Why did one work and one failed? I have two theories about that. Based on my theories I predict that the newest Iranian revolution will be crushed perhaps even brutally with extreme force and imprisonment of the most radical revolutionaries.

History tells us that almost every revolution begins with the students. Young people who rebel against almost anything anyway band together to revolt against society, against the harsh rules, against the tyrannical regime ruling their country. But this revolt is almost always doomed if it remains a student rebellion, if no one else joins in to help them. So my first theory is that successful revolutions are dependent upon the involvement of the older generations. If the fathers of these students stand on the side lines, worrying about their sons and daughters, but not participating, then there is little hope for the success of the chanting students. On the other hand, if men and women of all ages participate, as they did in the American Revolution than it has a greater chance of success.

I was glued to the TV watching the Tianamen Square revolt. I had never seen anything like this and was thrilled that these students would rise up against the crushing Communist government ruled by ancient old men. I thought of course this would make a difference. This rebellion just had to initiate needed changes in China. But then the soldiers and tanks moved in. I had cried when these students built their own Statue of Liberty, a touching heartfelt salute to my country. Days later, I cried again when I watched the military destroy this symbol of their hope for democracy. This was as upsetting to me as when I watched that lone student standing against those tanks. As quickly as the students had assembled and built their tent city it was demolished and the students imprisoned or in hiding. I finally realized that real life is not like the political thrillers I read. The world could be hard and cruel and the good guy doesn’t necessarily win.

Shortly after this happened, we witnessed the collapse of the Berlin Wall and later, Communist reign in Russia. So why did this work whereas the Tianamen Square revolt didn’t? I know that history books are filled with the facts and figures regarding both rebellions. But in a nut shell my first theory is that the Chinese rebellion was primarily led by students. On the other hand, one of the key figures in the downfall of Russia was a Polish union leader, Lech Walesa. Walesa was no starry eyed student but an experienced determined man who led his union and then his country into a coupe against the Russian leaders. Middle class men and women worked hand in hand with the students to revolt against the Communist regime.

Perhaps this is giving too much credit to my country, yet I can’t help but believe that America’s reaction was also a determining factor in another country’s successful rebellion. President Reagan stood firm against communism, going so far as to call Russia, the “evil empire” and loudly proclaiming that “Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall”. Wow. Between Reagan, Prime Minister Thatcher and the Pope there was constant pressure against Russia.

Compare Reagan’s emphatic statements and support of Walesa and all the rebels to the statements of President George H.W. Bush in 1989 about the China rebellion. In a memo declassified ten years later we read that Bush 41 said while he deplored the violence in China he “believes deeply that a solid relationship” between the countries was in the interest of world peace. Oh yeah, that is telling them.

Unlike his father, Bush 43 followed in the footsteps of Reagan by stating which countries were enemies to the US. He was never shy about using strong language when discussing Iran or North Korea. In return he was despised by these countries and I also believe he was actually feared. They saw him as a loose cannon, a wild cowboy who might shoot first and ask questions later. Yet I doubt if North Korea would have threatened to bomb Hawaii if Bush were still president. But more on this in a later blog.

OK, here we are today with a new revolution in Iran. Students are outraged at the recent election believing that it was rigged. They are probably correct but unfortunately based on my two theories this rebellion doesn’t stand a chance. As far as I can tell the revolt is still primarily driven by students. You simply don’t hear about older men participating in it. And now, the Guardian Council, Iran’s top electoral council, announced today that there was no fraud in the election. Yeah right. For those who disagree, the feared Revolutionary Guard is threatening to use violence to quash the rebellion.

As for American involvement, Obama’s tepid response is right up there with Bush 41’s lack of support. I sure miss Reagan who had no qualms about supporting groups that tried to replace despotic regimes with freedom and democracy. But Obama isn’t able to do that. Then again it is probably ludicrous to hope that Obama would support fledgling democracy abroad when our president isn’t able to support democracy in our own country.

So I believe that those Iranian students are doomed. Sooner or later the soldiers will silence this rebellion and the old leaders will continue to rule. I bet that Obama will then be one of the first to call and to set up a face to face meeting with the “re-elected” Iranian president Ahmadinejad before the blood of the students have even been scrubbed away from the streets.