In the contemporary political zeitgeist, it seems the term "revolution" has almost gone out of fashion. The idea that a mass of average people can effectively topple a government and bring about long-awaited justice rings of some kind of Enlightenment naiveté, or at least has been quashed by the cynical belief that grassroots movements in developing countries are driven by Western powers. Yet the distinct possibility remains that we could see a legitimate revolution during our lifetimes. That possibility remains in Iran.
How is it possible to make such a pronouncement? After all, Iran is a country cut off to much of the Western world, leaving us with precious little knowledge with which to make predictions. Visitors, especially those with American passports, have a hard time finding ways across the border. Once inside Iran, they are often subject to tight surveillance and their movements are strictly circumscribed. Little controversial material is allowed to emerge from the country in their hands.
Furthermore, Western media reports on Iran have not penetrated the superficiality of international diplomacy. American media churns out story after story about Iran's pursuit of nuclear energy and the radical pronouncements of its latest president, Mahmoud Ahmadinajad, while virtually ignoring the boiling popular unrest within the country itself. The result of the media's lack of insight in the region is that, to most Westerners, Iran remains yet another inscrutable Middle Eastern abyss.
Yet "Forbidden Iran," a 2004 documentary by PBS Frontline World reporter Jane Kokan, has the potential to open the world's eyes to an increasingly likely prospect - that of broad-based, anti-government grassroots, upheaval in the country. Her work is a testament to the power of quality journalism to reveal hidden truths and serves a wake-up call to those who assume Iranians have been rendered complacent to despotism.
Certainly the documentary is not perfect; it has been criticized for playing into the hands of neoconservatives by disproportionately focusing on the Iranian government's human rights violations and the country's secular, liberal opposition. Even its title, undoubtedly chosen to pique the interest of a Western audience, reflects orientalist clichés. The narration suffers from an undoubted sensationalist bias. Furthermore, restrictions on journalists in Iran have prevented adequate follow-ups to her story, so it remains unfortunately decontextualized. Yet the value of Kokan's film lies not in dispelling all Western misconceptions about Iran but rather in outlining the force and immediacy of a grassroots movement that may very soon change the country's - and the world's - political landscape.
Kokan, who snuck into Iran pretending to be an archaeologist, compiled video footage of a widespread student resistance movement that has spilled over into the broader population. In many ways it follows the trajectory of the underground resistance to the Shah before 1979. Opposition members have established elaborate, secretive networks of personal connections to plan activities and keep tabs on each other. Dozens of newspapers have been shut down for openly criticizing the regime. Thousands of political prisoners languish in jail, where torture, personal threats and executions are commonplace. The government uses its own "shock security troops" to conduct vigilante raids against groups it suspects of opposition - students at Tehran University were murdered in their dormitory during such a raid.
Perhaps most tellingly, protestors are flocking to the streets. In 1999, students in 22 cities protested the closure of the reformist newspaper Salam. In following years, members from the wider public began joining these protests in droves. "Student Day" in 2003 drew thousands of people, some holding pictures of Che Guevara, to denounce government violence. Protests and their violent suppression continue to occur away from the eyes of media organizations.
Predicting revolution in Iran may be especially appropriate considering that 70 percent of its population is under the age of 30. They are literally the offspring of the Islamic Revolution, and tension between them and the regime which they had no part in founding has been mounting for a generation. Many in the older generation share the youth's contempt for the government, combining it with the shattering disillusionment that accompanies the irreversible corruption of what was once a source for hope. After all, the "Islamic" Revolution did not resemble its contemporary fundamentalism - it began as a wide protest against tyranny and Western domination, in which both liberals and clerics stood side by side. The establishment of an Islamic republic in Iran came as a surprise to many, and its own tyranny later alienated even those who had originally supported it out of religious conviction.
While providing for the possibility of revolution in Iran during the current or coming generation, Kokan responsibly adds that today's Iranian opposition is not asking for military help from the West. "They don't want an Iraq-style invasion, and they certainly don't want American soldiers running around Tehran as if it were Baghdad," said Kokan in one interview. While it does not produce immediate foreign policy suggestions, her documentary is useful in shedding light on social trends in a closed country, in justifying our hopes for democratic movements in the Middle East and in reminding us that justice - radicalized in the form of revolution - is still an ideal for which people strive and sacrifice everything.
Natalie Smolenski '07 would revolt if vigilantes invaded her dorm.
