|
Iran: Khamenei backs Ahmadinejad |
 |
Iran has been on fire since the presidential election result gave President Mehmud Ahmadinejad a landslide victory over his nearest rival, Mir Hussein Mousavi, a reformist and former Prime Minister of the country. After initially agreeing to a vote re-count in selected constituencies where there were charges of rigging, the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei has ruled in favour of Ahmadinejad calling the election fair and ruling out its cancellation. The Government-backed Besij militia has been let loose on the followers of Mousavi, who have been holding street protests for days together to press for annulment of what they called the rigged election. Not since the 1979 Islamic Revolution have massed protesters gathered in such numbers or with such overwhelming popularity. This time, it is branded as a “green revolution” by the opposition, green being the colour of Islam and, “a symbol of struggle against the regime’s domination.” Observers in India are of the opinion that the election results and their aftermath have completely polarized Iran unleashing powerful and contradictory forces.
Though the Mousavi camp has increasing support, the size of Ahmadinejad’s political base cannot be underestimated either. Ahmadinejad has been popular among the country’s poor and lower middle class. Large segments of powerful State institutions such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and the Basij militia with an estimated strength of ten million, apparently support him. The President is known to be a sympathizer of the Haqqani school – an influential body based in Qom, Iran’s religious capital, headed by Mohammed Taghi-Mesah Yazdi, a formidable cleric who has substantial influence within the Iranian security establishment.
The view in India is that it would, have been a mistake for the West to expect that had Mousavi won, it would have been an end of radical conservatism of Iran, given the clout of the supreme commander and the Grand Ayatollahs of Qom. The protest against Ahmadinejad’s regime is being seen as part of an internal churning that has absolutely nothing to do with the way Iran, as a country, views itself vis-à-vis the world. Mousavi may have served as an instrument of much-needed change in Iran’s social, cultural and economic fabric but there is little to suggest he would have allayed the international community’s ultimate worry – Iran’s nuclear programme.
Mousavi vs Ahmadinejad: The first point to be noted is that none of the Presidential candidates spoke in opposition to the prevailing Islamic system despite the obvious frustration of the country’s predominantly young population with the repressive social mores and oppressive patriarchal rules under which women must live as compared to Ahmadinejad, Moussavi is in favour of more reforms. Son of a Tabriz businessman and an architect, Mousavi’s low political profile in the last two decades since he served as Iran’s last Prime Minister is attributed to his studied distance from the radicalized politics of Iran. In his election campaign he promised social justice, gender equality, freedom of expression – every bit the West’s poster boy. Ahmadinejad strategically never diverted his election campaign away from the sentimental issue of anti-Americanism, while Mousavi was seen to advocate better relations with the US. Ahmadinejad is an eyesore for the Western world as he popularized the idea of the nuclear programme among the masses. His domestic policies may not have earned him many domestic friends but his foreign policy enjoys wide support. He has vowed to wipe Israel off the face of this earth, on top of his incendiary nuclear talk challenging all proliferation norms.
Ahmadinejad’s confrontation with clerics:
The Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khameinei has leaned towards Ahmadinejad, but he cannot ignore the cracks in the top clergy and the voices of dissent against the President. Specifically, he cannot ignore Rafsanjani, who is chairman of the powerful Expediency Council, which mediates disputes, and the Assembly of Experts, There have been reports that the 89-member Assembly of Experts, headed by Rafsanjani and a strong opponent of Ahmadinejad, has been meeting in Qom. In a recent televised debate during the run-up to the elections, Ahmadinejad openly accused Ayatollah Rafsanjani and his family of mafia-like corruption. Rafsanjani, a former President, responded with a blistering letter to Khamenei. The President’s suggestion that corruption was endemic to the revolution also angered Qom clerical establishment which responded with its own dissenting letter. Also, the Speaker of Parliament, Ali Larijani, has gone on record to criticize “certain members” of the supervisory Guardian Council of being partial to “a certain presidential candidate” – an obvious reference to President Ahmadainejad.
The reformist clerics organized under the Association of Combatant Clergy, which include former President Mohammed Khatami and Mehdi Karroubi a presidential candidate in the recent election, support the opposition. Flouting the Supreme Leader’s assertion not to question the polls, Khatami has demanded the appointment of a neutral panel to review the results. Significantly Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri a dissident cleric who was initially meant to succeed Ayatollah Khomenei, has expressed his support for the Teheran revolt by rejecting the election results.
Victory of radicals over moderates: The factions within the ruling elite in Iran can be classified as conservative, pragmatist and radical. The conservatives succeeded in electing Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as the new Supreme Leader. A middle ranking cleric and a former President of the Republic, Khamenei was very much a compromise candidate. He possessed neither the spiritual stature nor the political clout to match his predecessor. Consequently Khameini had an uneasy start as Supreme Leader. The need to buttress his position led him to play a more partisan role in politics. But, his position was further weakened by the fact that Rafsanjani had been appointed President.
Rafsanjani was leader of the pragmatic wing of the clerical elite. When he became President, on the top of his agenda was economic reconstruction after long war with Iraq. In pursuit of this economic agenda, Rafsanjani inducted technocrats into his Cabinet and marginalized the clerics. During his tenure, Rafsanjani and the conservatives joined forces against the radicals among the clerical elite. The radicals had denounced Rafsanjani’s economic programme as a dilution of the ideals of the revolution and an attempt at normalization of relations with the West. Paradoxically, after a period in political wilderness, many radicals refashioned themselves as reformists standing for “Islamic democracy” in Iran and increased openness to the world outside.
Under the leadership of Mohammed Khatami, the reformists initially took over the Presidency and subsequently obtained a majority in Parliament. But, despite eight years in power, their attempts at reform were stymied by the conservatives who controlled the non-elected institutions of government.
Even as the electorate grew disenchanted with the reformists, a new force took shape in Iran’s politics The neo-conservatives or radicals were led by veterans of the war against Iraq, who professed strong allegiance to the Khomeinite legacy. By yoking ideology to a populist economic agenda, they managed to displace the reformists. This was the significance of Ahmadinejad’s election as President in 2005. The alleged rigging of the recent elections needs to be seen in this backdrop. It in the manifestation of the battle between radicals, represented by Ahmadinejad, and the moderates represented by Mousavi.
|
