Iran ' Sees No Point' In Foreign Election Monitors

[webfact]

Iran 'sees no point' in foreign election monitors

TEHRAN: -- Tehran sees no reason to invite international monitors to the upcoming presidential election on June 14, Iran’s Ambassador to Moscow Mahmoud Reza Sajjadi told Russian reporters on Monday.

“We see no point in inviting monitors from abroad,” Mr. Sajjadi said at the news conference. “The important thing is for the nation to be satisfied with the fact that the vote is running off on the premises of freedom.”

The Ambassador noted that, all too often, foreign watchdogs served the interests of other countries instead of Iran’s.

He added Iran is strewn with 120 outposts of foreign mass media, with some 200 international correspondents reporting from its ground.

“I believe that media are a very good foreign watchdog on their own,” Mr. Sajjadi underscored.

Source: http://english.ruvr.ru/news/2013_06_10/Iran-sees-no-point-in-foreign-election-monitors-2804/

-- THE VOICE OF RUSSIA 2013-06-10

[JetsetBkk]

“The important thing is for the nation to be satisfied with the fact that the vote is running off on the premises of freedom.”

Premises? But not promises.

[lungmi]

Thailand refused OECD monitors with the same arguments. I quote by memory, but other posters have better databank than me. They can correct me.

[Ulysses G.]

Iran has a legitimate point. No one expects this election to be honest anyhow.

[Jingthing]

Iran has a legitimate point. No one expects this election to be honest anyhow.

Indeed. Any real opposition candidates weren't even ALLOWED to run in the first place, mandated by their dictatorial theocratic regime, so their election is a total farce even before it is held. Iranians who care had best just NOT VOTE because by voting they are endorsing the idea that Iran has a legitimate system, which it most definitely DOES NOT.

Edited June 10, 2013 by Jingthing

[Payboy]

Iran 'sees no point' in foreign election monitors

Luckily, they have no objection to baht bus monitors.

[Jingthing]

The point is for show.

[Scott]

The topic is Iran.

[Scott]

I see the trolls are out in full force on this topic. This will be the last warning some of you receive. This topic is about Iran. It is reported in The Voice of Russia. The US is not mentioned in the OP or in the link.

Continue this posting style at your own peril.

[Chicog]

Iran's security is going to depend to a great deal on which of the candidates they've arranged to be the new leader. Of course what the people actually want is of little importance here, the Guardian council and the Ayatollahs stay in power and the military continue to support them.

If they try and start another Green revolution, it will end in the same result: mass arrests and executions.

[Suradit69]

Iran's security is going to depend to a great deal on which of the candidates they've arranged to be the new leader. Of course what the people actually want is of little importance here, the Guardian council and the Ayatollahs stay in power and the military continue to support them.

If they try and start another Green revolution, it will end in the same result: mass arrests and executions.

Certainly Iran is not the first country that comes to mind when thinking democracy, but even in those countries considered models of representative government, the choice of candidates for whom you are eventually allowed to vote is limited by numerous constraints, including the need to toe the various party lines and to suck up to those with money that they will contribute (and agendas to be advanced). And, of course, even if the will of the people is supposedly respected, you can end up with an initially popular government that turns out to be a cabal of ineffective idiots anyway.

I spent about 10 days in Iran about 12 years ago. I enjoyed the experience and everyone was quite nice, but there was definitely a depressing aura that hung over everything and everyone. We spent the whole time shepherded about by government approved "minders," although at the start there was a screw-up because we were meant to fly into Teheran, but bad weather forced us to divert to a small town on the Iraqi border. The Immigrations officials there went a little bug-eyed when we pitched up, but everyone eventually regarded it as an amusing change of pace and we were treated quite well ... and collected the next morning for a trip by car back to Isfahan, and later Shiraz and Teheran. Have to admit I felt relieved when we cleared immigrations for our flight back to Dubai.

Edited June 11, 2013 by Suradit69

[sonar6ca]

Iran, who gives a s**t.

[simple1]

Iran, who gives a s**t.

A very quick example. All the regional countries, Russia, China, EU countries, UK & USA.

Edited June 11, 2013 by simple1

[khunken]

After wading through some Israeli propaganda about the usual red line crap, it's not too difficult to see why Iran doesn't trust 'monitors' especially from countries trying to humiliate it.

The selection of candidates is definitely not democratic but the election of one of those selected will be pretty close to fair. Ahmedinejad was elected by the same method and eventually became a thorn in the side of the supreme Ayatollah as well as very popular.

While the process is far from perfect, it is certainly better that what exists in many of it's neighbours to the west (Saudi, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, etc) who are supported by so-called freedom loving countries.

[Ulysses G.]

The selection of candidates is definitely not democratic but the election of one of those selected will be pretty close to fair.

So the ayatollahs stack the deck with men that they want in power and then the Iranian people get to "fairly" choose between them. That sounds like the Soviet Union in the bad old days.

[Naam]

Iran has a legitimate point. No one expects this election to be honest anyhow.

Indeed. Any real opposition candidates weren't even ALLOWED to run in the first place, mandated by their dictatorial theocratic regime, so their election is a total farce even before it is held. Iranians who care had best just NOT VOTE because by voting they are endorsing the idea that Iran has a legitimate system, which it most definitely DOES NOT.

JT objects, Iranians will vote. result: JT p*ssed off and creates polls:

Do you support reject elections in Iran or yes?

alternative:

Is the Iranification of Pattaya Baht buses by potential enemy combattants a good thing?

[khunken]

The selection of candidates is definitely not democratic but the election of one of those selected will be pretty close to fair.

So the ayatollahs stack the deck with men that they want in power and then the Iranian people get to "fairly" choose between them. That sounds like the Soviet Union in the bad old days.

No it doesn't. There was no involvement of the Soviet people in choosing their leader. The party did it just like what happens in China.

Please don't selectively use part of my posts for a reply.

[Scott]

Troll post and reply have been removed.

The topic is about Iran and Election Monitors.

[Cardiff1963]

The selection of candidates is definitely not democratic but the election of one of those selected will be pretty close to fair.

So the ayatollahs stack the deck with men that they want in power and then the Iranian people get to "fairly" choose between them. That sounds like the Soviet Union in the bad old days.

If it were big business stacking the deck it would sound like someone else these days.

[samran]

The fact that Iran has elections is one of the oft. overlooked aspects of the country. Though they aren't (and are far from) perfect, they are a heck of a lot more preferable to the monarchies which dominate the Gulf States who are nominally western allies.

I've been though many parts of the Middle East, and very much like and respect the region. Though I've never made it as far as Iran, by all accounts their people are some of the most friendly and hospitable in the world. So it is a shame they have a crap government, but as I said, a partial election is better than none at all.

[Steely Dan]

There's even less reason for monitors now, coming to think of it, with the only reformist candidate pulling out of the race there is no need to have an election at all.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22851764

The sole reformist candidate in this week's Iranian presidential election, Mohammad Reza Aref, has dropped out of the race, his website says.

Mr Aref said the head of the reformist movement, former president Mohammad Khatami, had asked him to withdraw.

[Jingthing]

Well, maybe I was wrong.

The Iranian voters did what they COULD do within their repressive system, and given that, it was pretty darned impressive.

Kudos to the Iranian voters!

They did similarly the last time and the results were clearly "fixed" and we saw the state murder of Iranian people in the streets after that ...

I reckon if a REAL reformer had been allowed to run, he would have similarly won the race at least by votes if not announced results.

Cynics might say this is a ploy by the string pullers to persuade the west to soften on sanctions and nuclear restrictions.
The cynics are probably right.

This result was ALLOWED to happen by the true powers in Iran, after all.

But the people power aspect remains impressive.

Best of luck to the Iranian people.

I wonder if there will ever be a U.S. embassy there again!

Edited June 17, 2013 by Jingthing

[simple1]

Well, maybe I was wrong.

The Iranian voters did what they COULD do within their repressive system, and given that, it was pretty darned impressive.

Kudos to the Iranian voters!

They did similarly the last time and the results were clearly "fixed" and we saw the state murder of Iranian people in the streets after that ...

I reckon if a REAL reformer had been allowed to run, he would have similarly won the race at least by votes if not announced results.

Cynics might say this is a ploy by the string pullers to persuade the west to soften on sanctions and nuclear restrictions.

The cynics are probably right.

This result was ALLOWED to happen by the true powers in Iran, after all.

But the people power aspect remains impressive.

Best of luck to the Iranian people.

I wonder if there will ever be a U.S. embassy there again!

Excerpt from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324520904578551190064298704.html

The Islamic Republic's overarching policies on matters such as its nuclear program, relations with the U.S. and its support of Syria's regime are decided above the president's level. Mr. Khamenei and his close circle of advisers typically decide the direction of these policies, and the president executes them. Mr. Khamenei has said over the past year that Iran would gain nothing by normalizing relations with the U.S.

Edited June 18, 2013 by Scott

[Loptr]

The fact that Iran has elections is one of the oft. overlooked aspects of the country. Though they aren't (and are far from) perfect, they are a heck of a lot more preferable to the monarchies which dominate the Gulf States who are nominally western allies.

I've been though many parts of the Middle East, and very much like and respect the region. Though I've never made it as far as Iran, by all accounts their people are some of the most friendly and hospitable in the world. So it is a shame they have a crap government, but as I said, a partial election is better than none at all.

Too bad we can't banish all governments in the world and start over. For some reason, John Lennon's Imagine comes to mind.

[samran]

Well, maybe I was wrong.

The Iranian voters did what they COULD do within their repressive system, and given that, it was pretty darned impressive.

Kudos to the Iranian voters!

They did similarly the last time and the results were clearly "fixed" and we saw the state murder of Iranian people in the streets after that ...

I reckon if a REAL reformer had been allowed to run, he would have similarly won the race at least by votes if not announced results.

Cynics might say this is a ploy by the string pullers to persuade the west to soften on sanctions and nuclear restrictions.

The cynics are probably right.

This result was ALLOWED to happen by the true powers in Iran, after all.

But the people power aspect remains impressive.

Best of luck to the Iranian people.

I wonder if there will ever be a U.S. embassy there again!

Excerpt from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324520904578551190064298704.html

The Islamic Republic's overarching policies on matters such as its nuclear program, relations with the U.S. and its support of Syria's regime are decided above the president's level. Mr. Khamenei and his close circle of advisers typically decide the direction of these policies, and the president executes them. Mr. Khamenei has said over the past year that Iran would gain nothing by normalizing relations with the U.S.

While you are right that they are decisions which lie above the Presidents pay grade, there is something about having a mandate from the people which does give you some negotiation power.

[simple1]

Well, maybe I was wrong.

The Iranian voters did what they COULD do within their repressive system, and given that, it was pretty darned impressive.

Kudos to the Iranian voters!

They did similarly the last time and the results were clearly "fixed" and we saw the state murder of Iranian people in the streets after that ...

I reckon if a REAL reformer had been allowed to run, he would have similarly won the race at least by votes if not announced results.

Cynics might say this is a ploy by the string pullers to persuade the west to soften on sanctions and nuclear restrictions.

The cynics are probably right.

This result was ALLOWED to happen by the true powers in Iran, after all.

But the people power aspect remains impressive.

Best of luck to the Iranian people.

I wonder if there will ever be a U.S. embassy there again!

Excerpt from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324520904578551190064298704.html

The Islamic Republic's overarching policies on matters such as its nuclear program, relations with the U.S. and its support of Syria's regime are decided above the president's level. Mr. Khamenei and his close circle of advisers typically decide the direction of these policies, and the president executes them. Mr. Khamenei has said over the past year that Iran would gain nothing by normalizing relations with the U.S.

While you are right that they are decisions which lie above the Presidents pay grade, there is something about having a mandate from the people which does give you some negotiation power.

Let's see how much negotiating power leeway he will have. A good indication would be if he could get released those still subjected to house arrest, the green leaders (moderates), from the 2009 elections.