Frontline’s reporter Meir Javedanfar thinks the violence heralds an “Iranian intifada.”

Judging from the events of Ashura, however, they now seem to have the potential to turn into a full scale-civil disobedience campaign, not unlike the first intifada that the Palestinians initiated against Israel in 1987. This will mean continuous periods of strikes and civil disobedience, as well as more confrontations between members of the public and security forces.

The main factor contributing to the new status quo is the unrelenting policies of the Supreme Leader, which have pitted his version of the Islamic Republic against longstanding Islamic institutions.

This is a battle that he will find extremely difficult to win. In fact, if developments continue in their current form, they can, at a minimum, result in significant changes to the structure of his regime, or more drastically, lead to its total demise.

A statement released by Mike Hammer, a spokesman for the National Security Council, on the violence, reads:

We strongly condemn the violent and unjust suppression of civilians in Iran seeking to exercise their universal rights. Hope and history are on the side of those who peacefully seek their universal rights, and so is the United States. Governing through fear and violence is never just, and as President Obama said in Oslo – it is telling when governments fear the aspirations of their own people more than the power of any other nation.

… at least three Iranian newspapers reported that of 290 members of the Iranian Parliament invited to a victory party for him Wednesday night, only 105 attended, suggesting a deep divide within the political elite over the election and its aftermath.

That won’t overturn an election, but it might be an indicator that the center of gravity for meeting minimal demands of the protesters is with the elites, and not out on the streets. In Qom, ex-president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani is doing … something that we don’t really know about, but reportedly (well, much-speculated-ly) he’s attempting to convince the Assembly of Experts to dislodge Supreme Leader Ali Khamanei. I don’t know if this bit of elite-based speculation is well-grounded. But it looks like there needs to be some renewed exogenous event to re-spark a mass opposition movement. Mir Hussein Moussavi told supporters that he’s not backing down, but the regime has little incentive to compromise if it can break up the demonstrations through violence and withstand elite challenges.

Their ideal regime would create a state-run capitalist class eager to profit in international markets to the detriment of blue-collar workers in Iran and any independent private sector. It would be a rentier state based on political allegiances, brimming with discrimination and corruption and maintained by the machineries of oppression. If left unchecked, Khamenei’s efforts would further consolidate power in the hands of a select few — all but guaranteeing the ultimate triumph of sultanism in Iran.

You can take five minutes away from Sanford, can’t you?

All of which explains why opposition figures aren’t taking the Guardian Council’s offer seriously. @Change_For_Iran tweets:

all ballots are destroyed! what are they actually going to recount?!

At the moment, the regime is banning foreign journalists from reporting on street demonstrations, and pro-Ahmadinejad forces, heavily represented by the Baseej militia, are holding a rally in Tehran. We know about this through Twitter, which, despite worries from friends of mine, is proving to be a vital tool for internal opposition organizing and external communication.

A friend called who with a shaking voice asked me for an explanation on what is happening in Iran, in our country.

I said, the Supreme Leader has decided to replace the Islamic Republic with an Islamic government and that we all have to participate in this “great celebration” and be “deeply happy…”

These young people who are being beaten in the streets of Tehran and other provinces, whose faces look stunned, Mr. Mousavi and fighting clergies who issue statements, think it is possible to protect the Republic and the people’s votes.  It is very clear to me that 22 Khordad 1388, four months after the revolution turned 30, the time of Republic has come to an end in our country.  Ahmadinejad, with confirmation of the Supreme Leader, has obtained the necessary votes and won.  Congratulations on this victory…Although no celebration happens without victims and the bigger the celebration, the larger the number of casualties…

22 Bahman was the beginning of the Islamic Revolution and 22 Khordad is the beginning of the Islamic Government.

My friend started crying louder; bitterly crying.

Notice what’s happening here. The opposition to Ahmadinejad is portraying him and his supporters as a corrupting figure, eating the Islamic Revolution at its core. They’re portraying themselves as somewhere on the spectrum of reformists and restorationists. I wish I remembered my Crane Brinton better for a more precise taxonomy. But this is what Iranian human rights activists in the United States mean when they point out that a crucial weapon in the protesters’ arsenal is their claim of authenticity.  If they’re supplying a reformist definition for the mantle of the true Islamic Revolution, with a demagogue like Ahmadinejad as a usurper, that won’t solve all of the U.S.’s problems with Iran by a long shot. But it does open up the prospect of real, substantive dialogue if they win.

I have no real information here, so take everything that follows with an ocean of salt. But I wonder if the fear of losing control of the Islamic Revolution itself is what drove Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to reverse his initial endorsement of Ahmadinejad’s election and order an inquiry into voter fraud.