Iran!! What Next?

TW: The situation in Iran is fascinating. The election appears to have been at a minimum severely disrupted by the incumbent powers. Will the incumbents be able to put the "democracy" genie back into the bottle? How will markets react on Monday? What if anything can the U.S. and the West do to postively influence the outcome? What is the positive outcome?

For now many more questions than answers but I have a hunch that this is going to be big one way or the other.

From Steve Benen at Washington Monthly:

"White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters today that the administration..is now "monitor[ing] the entire situation closely..."

...It's tempting to think "monitoring the situation" is not only passive, but unproductive. It's why I was interested in this item from Spencer Ackerman, who talked to the strongly anti-Ahmedinejad Hadi Ghaemi, a spokesman for the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran.

"...I think it's wise for the U.S. government to keep its distance," Ghaemi says. The White House can and should "show concern for human life and protesters' safety and promote tolerance and dialogue." But to get any further involved, even rhetorically, would "instigate the cry that the reformers are somehow driven and directed by the U.S., whether under Bush or under Obama, and there's no reason to give that unfounded allegation" any chance to spread. [...]
After years of being told in this country that no initiative for the expansion of global human rights will occur absent active U.S. support, Ghaemi's advice can come across as passivity or indifference. But that reflects a certain arrogance, and occurs at the expense of the goal in question. "We should not have the U.S. lead," says Ghaemi.

In other words, the more the administration pushes, the less it's likely to help. So, we get a lot of "monitoring the situation," with subtle references to "reports of irregularities" and "hopes" that the outcome "reflects the genuine will and desire of the Iranian people."