Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Follow Carnegie
- Search
- Global Resources
Global Centers
Languages
While Europe and the United States have been vocal in their response to the turmoil in Iran, its neighbors in the Arab world have been noticeably silent.
In the aftermath of Iran's disputed election the opposition has grown bolder, seeking to fundamentally change the system of government by abolishing or seriously weakening unelected leadership positions, including that of the Supreme Leader, whose authority has never been challenged before.
Whereas the Bush administration united Iran's disparate political factions against a commmon threat, Obama's overtures have accentuated deep internal rifts amongst Iranian political elites.
Though the White House released a written statement Saturday in which President Obama used his strongest language to date to condemn what he called a "violent and unjust" government crackdown on protesters, critics say he needs to show more leadership on the issue.
Iran's disputed presidential elections have revealed and accentuated rifts among the clerical leadership.
Violence in the aftermath of Iran’s election has raised questions about the future of the regime, and about the way the Obama administration should respond to this controversial situation.
Continuing unrest following allegations of fraud in Iran's presidential election has created a leadership crisis for Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei.
The continued unrest in Iran has called into question how different Mousavi's policies would be compared to Ahmadinejad.
Iranian protests in the past have always pitted the people against the regime. Demonstrations over the presidential election outcome are different because of the unprecedented fissures amongst the revolutionary elite themselves.
The Obama administration has wisely taken a cautious approach to reacting to the unrest in Iran and allegations of election fraud.