Mousavi has lost the election and the US and other western nations are upset that a chance for a progressive Iran is lost. But is it? Mousavi was Prime Minister during first Ayotollah Khomeni and very much a conservative if not more conservative than Ahmadinejad. If Mousavi would have won, I do not think there would have been much change.
Azar Nafisi who authored Things I've Been Silent About, and is also a visiting professor and the executive director of Cultural Conversations at the Foreign Policy Institute of Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies in Washington DC writes that:
"In order to win Mousavi had taken up the progressive slogans, which he had previously fought against. I was there at the beginning of the Islamic Revolution when he was the Prime Minister, and implemented many of the repressive measures which he now denounces.So there you go, Mousavi was not much of a progressive as he is built up to be in the west. I believe as far as the US and Middle East is concerned not much has changed. The only way to settle instability in that part of the world is to deal with the Palestinian issue head on and solve it. That will take lot of wind from under the wings of extremists and fundamentalists in the region.
I (like many others) was thrown out of the university that Mousavi helped to shut down as part of the Cultural Revolution."
As far as the election in Iran is concerned, it seems the results are fair but then we do not know the details. However, I will say this much, that they do not seem to be as badly rigged as the Bush brothers succeeded to do in Florida in 2000 - remember those hanging chads. I believe that victory was stolen from Al Gore. If Al Gore had taken office in 2000, we would have a different world today. In my humble opinion a better world. Recommend this post