Syria Under Increasing Pressure After Suspension by Arab League

[Viking]

Is the Arab League like the Justice League?

Yeah, just like the Justice League... only with more



added

[Razgovory]

Is the Arab League like the Justice League?

Well neither really do anything useful.

[Ideologue]

I'd like to see the Leopard MBT in action. Just for the lulz.

Zombie Hermann Hoth approves.

That guy looked dead even when was alive.

[Ed Anger]

I'd like to see the Leopard MBT in action. Just for the lulz.

Zombie Hermann Hoth approves.

That guy looked dead even when was alive.

Hermann Hoth looks like Putin. Go look and see.

[Ideologue]

Little bit maybe.  If a vampire subsists on the blood of Slavs, does it make him stronger, weaker, or just not as strong as a properly Aryan-fed vampire?

[Ed Anger]

He's so dreamy.

[Sheilbh]

I can't see any reason why we should get involved or why we'd want to.  Though I think if they do get involved and want any help - such as money - we should probably back the Turks up. 

I've read that there are rumours that they're already in Syria and have set up safe zones, but that's just rumours about the Mid-East.  To give credit to the Turks in both the case of Libya and Syria they had thousands of expats and billions invested and yet, eventually decided to focus more on the repression.  I think they've been pretty admirable in the whole Arab uprisings and have been about the only country in the region to keep their head.

I'm not surprised it's shifting to violence given that the army are now, reportedly, starting to defect.  That the first 6-7 months of protests remained peaceful in spite of thousands of deaths is, I think, remarkable.

Given that I don't necessarily think this will inevitably be a bloodbath if Assad falls.  But he has unfortunately he has successful tied the Allawites entirely to his regime from what I can see.

The Arab League are generally absurd, but we should give them credit for the past year.  They've managed to act - twice! - and both times have probably got it right.  That's probably a record.

Oddly on the Iranians they're going through some shit at the minute anyway.  Assad's unpopularity and brutal repression's left them pretty exposed in the Arab world - given the direction Arab opinions moving towards.  As far as I can see they've got the Assad's, Iraq and Hezbullah left.  Aside from that they're struggling.  Even Hamas have distanced themselves from Assad.  At the same time they're struggling with sanctions and what seems like a pretty successful Israeli sabotage campaign.  Now they're openly divided at the top of the regime - Khameini threatening to abolish the Presidency, Ahmedinejad saying no-one can overthrow the will of the people.  All of which, in my view, makes Iran more dangerous and risky than ever.

Also, on an unrelated note, what's happening in Kuwait?  I read last night that protestors stormed Parliament demanding the resignation of the PM.

[Jacob]

Now they're openly divided at the top of the regime - Khameini threatening to abolish the Presidency, Ahmedinejad saying no-one can overthrow the will of the people.  All of which, in my view, makes Iran more dangerous and risky than ever.

I haven't been following this... what's going on in Iran right now? Khameini vs Ahmedinejad?

[jimmy olsen]

Now they're openly divided at the top of the regime - Khameini threatening to abolish the Presidency, Ahmedinejad saying no-one can overthrow the will of the people.  All of which, in my view, makes Iran more dangerous and risky than ever.

I haven't been following this... what's going on in Iran right now? Khameini vs Ahmedinejad?

IIRC Khameini's proposed moving to a parliamentary system in order to get rid of Ahmedinejad.

[Sheilbh]

I haven't been following this... what's going on in Iran right now? Khameini vs Ahmedinejad?

Yeah it's been building for a while.  But recently it seems to have got a bit more serious though:

President v supreme leader
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is fighting tooth and nail to keep his presidency

..THE feud between Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is becoming increasingly bitter and public. Mr Khamenei has hinted that he may abolish the presidency altogether, replacing it with an honorary post elected by members of parliament rather than directly by the people. It was a pointed reminder that the supreme leader has the final say.

Mr Ahmadinejad seems reluctant to take the hint. He responded with a defiant speech of his own, declaring that anyone who defied the will of the Iranian people would be "destroyed". Months of simmering mistrust had already boiled over in April when Mr Ahmadinejad sacked Heydar Moslehi, Iran's intelligence minister, only to see him promptly reinstated by the supreme leader.

Mr Ahmadinejad is fighting his corner with tenacity. But his support has been ebbing. The recent exposure of a banking fraud involving $2.6 billion may have fatally weakened his grip on the presidency. Several of his close allies are implicated. His opponents scent blood.

The president was called before parliament to face questions over the affair. Forged documents, it is said, were used to get loans from seven Iranian banks and the money used to buy stakes in state-owned companies. Loyalists of Mr Khamenei want to pin the scandal on Mr Ahmadinejad's friends and lay the blame for Iran's drooping economy at the president's door.

One ally, Seyed Hamid Pour-Mohammadi, the central bank's deputy governor, has been arrested. Another, Shamsoddin Hosseini, the finance minister, narrowly survived a bid to have him impeached. The speaker, Ali Larijani, urged MPs to back him, switching tactics after previously threatening to name other presidential allies for alleged involvement in the scam.

Both Mr Pour-Mohammadi and Mr Hosseini have been proponents of the president's economic strategy. Mr Pour-Mohammadi heads a committee set up to soften the impact of international sanctions against Iran. Mr Hosseini was an architect of Mr Ahmadinejad's controversial plan to abolish subsidies on electricity, fuel and food, which used to cost $100 billion a year. The plan to replace them was forced through parliament earlier this year. Since then the price of basic commodities has soared and a new system of cash handouts targeted at the poor has not kept pace with inflation. Protests and strikes over unpaid wages and the cost of living are increasing.

Mr Khamenei's supporters are baying for the president's blood but the supreme leader is wary of delivering the coup de grâce; he is meant to be above petty politics. He looked weak when his endorsement failed to win Mr Ahmadinejad the presidential election in 2009 fair and square. Instead, he was obliged to order a harsh crackdown to crush the thwarted opposition. Discarding the president two years later might further undermine Mr Khamenei's position. But the banking scandal may present him with an irresistible chance to sack Mr Ahmadinejad while maintaining the moral high ground.

Mr Ahmadinejad was handpicked by ultra-conservatives to sweep away the corruption of previous reform-minded governments. But if his own administration is found guilty of sleaze, many senior clerics may sense an opportunity to end what they see as Iran's ill-advised experiment with democracy—by seeking to abolish the presidency altogether.

That article's as good as any but I've not seen anything that really seems to explain what's going on.  I'd be interested to see what's behind all of this.  The best I've read is this al-Jazeera article from a while back:
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/06/201162994514399969.html

[KRonn]

THE feud between Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is becoming increasingly bitter and public. Mr Khamenei has hinted that he may abolish the presidency altogether, replacing it with an honorary post elected by members of parliament rather than directly by the people. It was a pointed reminder that the supreme leader has the final say.

Mr Ahmadinejad was handpicked by ultra-conservatives to sweep away the corruption of previous reform-minded governments. But if his own administration is found guilty of sleaze, many senior clerics may sense an opportunity to end what they see as Iran's ill-advised experiment with democracy—by seeking to abolish the presidency altogether.

So Iran gets rid of the President, and replaces that office with what? Does even more control go to hard liners? Given that Ahmadinejad is hard line and a huge problem, but a semblance of democracy, what then comes after? As much as it seems a good idea for him go it's unclear that anything would be better in Iran, or with their nuke program, or their stance towards the region.

[Razgovory]

"It is pleasant, when the sea is high and the winds are dashing the waves about, to watch from the shores the struggles of another" Lucretius