{"id":2471,"date":"2013-06-23T08:39:25","date_gmt":"2013-06-23T08:39:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/hopoi.org\/?p=2471"},"modified":"2013-06-23T08:39:25","modified_gmt":"2013-06-23T08:39:25","slug":"iran-election-not-a-victory-for-progressives","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/?p=2471","title":{"rendered":"Iran election: Not a victory for progressives"},"content":{"rendered":"

\t\t\t\t\"rowhani\"<\/a>On Friday June 14, Iranians voted in large numbers for ayatollah Hassan Rowhani, a regime insider who was elected as Iran\u2019s president with 50.71% of the vote. A centrist, not a \u2018reformist\u2019, he became the candidate of an unofficial coalition between \u2018reformists\u2019 and \u2018centrists\u2019 forged three days before the vote, after green leader and former president Mohammad Khatami asked the \u2018reformist\u2019 candidate, Mohammad Reza Aref, to withdraw from the elections.<\/p>\n

Rowhani won not because of who he is, but as a result of a massive protest vote against the candidates associated with various \u2018principlist\u2019 factions of Iran\u2019s Islamic regime. Iranians opted once more to use the electoral system to show their hatred for the conservatives and principlists who have been in power for the last eight years. These groups promised \u2018social justice\u2019 and a clampdown on corruption in 2005 and 2009, yet the gap between the rich and the poor is far wider than when they took office and corruption now engulfs every institution of the state. Nor is it surprising that the people blame them for the sanctions and Iran\u2019s disastrous economic position.<\/p>\n

This was a vote for the least worst candidate. And in desperation the supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, is now ready to compromise with the centrist factions of the Islamic regime. Last week former \u2018reformist\u2019 president Hashemi Rafsanjani, who was not accepted as a candidate this time round, warned that Khamenei must wake up to the realities of Iran\u2019s current situation. Whether because of this, or out of a concern that after a lacklustre electoral campaign turnout would be low, Khamenei intervened forcefully to encourage people to vote. Even those who \u201cdo not support the Islamic system\u201d should come out and vote for the sake of the country, he said. That was an historic first – Iran\u2019s top religious leader has never previously addressed opponents of the Islamic Republic in this manner.<\/p>\n

In the last week of the campaign Khamenei went out of his way to emphasise that no-one around him knew his personal choice and, as far as he was concerned, all six candidates on the ballot paper were acceptable. Saeed Jalili, and to a certain extent Ali Akbar Velayati, had been touted as the leader\u2019s favourites by their respective campaign offices. Khamenei\u2019s statement meant that no cleric could whisper at a religious meeting or in a mosque that, although this was a \u2018free vote\u2019, the supreme leader had a particular candidate in mind. On election day itself, at many voting stations outside Iran in consulates or offices set up by the government, women were allowed to vote without wearing the compulsory headscarf. Even inside the country some women wearing only symbolic head cover rather than a proper hijab were allowed into voting stations.<\/p>\n

However, the question on everyone\u2019s mind is if the supreme leader and his close advisors were going to allow a centrist president, why was Rafsanjani barred from standing? One explanation is that he would have presented more of a challenge to the supreme leader, while Rowhani is less of a threat.<\/p>\n

Then there is the issue of the vote itself. One thing is clear: the conservatives were so confident that at least one conservative would get into the second round that they refused to rally around a single candidate. Iranians have taught them a lesson and the recriminations have only just started.<\/p>\n

Suspicious<\/h4>\n

Having said that, the way the results were announced by the ministry of interior raised questions. A psephologist or polling statistician would have been seriously concerned. The share of the vote for each candidate remained more or less static from the announcement of the first result in the morning through to the final declaration in the evening. Rowhani was standing at between 50.01% and 50.9%, while the tally for Mohammad Qalibaf in second place hovered between 15.77% and 15.9%. There was a similar standard deviation for the other five candidates.1<\/sup><\/a> Yet the results were declared region by region, some from rural areas, others from cities. It was highly suspicious that there was so little variation – surely the percentage after each announcement should have vacillated far more, especially following the early results. I am sure that if any of the conservatives had won the \u2018reformists\u2019 would have accused the ministry of interior of cheating on the basis of these virtually unchanging percentages. That is what they did after the re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2009.<\/p>\n

I asked a reputed mathematician what he thought. \u201cYou don\u2019t need to be an expert\u201d, he told me, \u201cto see that such stable figures stink. I have never seen anything like this in real elections. This is very unlikely, since I am pretty certain that the later sample is from a different part of the country, with a different political profile, than the earlier sample. If all the samples, early and late, came from areas with a similar profile, then the figures would be more believable.\u201d<\/p>\n

Let me emphasise that I am not saying Rowhani would not have won and that he would not have finished well above the runner-up, Qalibaf, who lost a lot of support after the final pre-election debate. However, a fraction over 50% is very convenient for the supreme leader. This way the country is seen as divided 50-50 between principlists and centrists\/\u2018reformists\u2019, the authorities are happy and the people are ecstatic – indeed there were major celebrations, under the slogan, \u201cWe have taken back our vote\u201d. This is a reference to the disputed 2009 elections, when \u2018reformist\u2019 Mir-Hossein Moussavi was thought to be well ahead, yet Ahmadinejad was declared the winner.<\/p>\n

If this was referendum on the state\u2019s intransigence regarding the nuclear issue and the economic consequences that followed, then there is little doubt that the conservatives lost. Most significantly, demonstrators celebrating in the streets of Tehran and other major cities saw this as a victory against the supreme leader. Slogans ranged from \u201cDeath to the dictator\u201d and \u201cFree all political prisoners\u201d to \u201cBye bye, Ahmadi\u201d and \u201cMartyred brother, martyred sister, we got back your vote\u201d. This was a reference not just to disputed elections of 2009, but to the repression that followed, when hundreds were killed in the streets or in prison.2<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

These slogans demonstrated a level of maturity. For example, the chant, \u201cRowhani, we will guide you\u201d, spoke volumes. Large sections of the population do not trust the centrists or \u2018reformists\u2019 and, given the little breathing space they have gained, they are expressing the widely held view that factions of the regime are only pro-reform because the population, in its opposition to the entire regime, pushes them in that direction.<\/p>\n

This election was a major setback for exile groups of the left and the right who had not expected the regime to be able to assert itself in such a skilful way. Many had pinned their hopes on western funds for regime change, and \u2018Marxists\u2019 have been among those who have accepted financial support from the US as well as rightwing governments in Canada and the Netherlands. Clearly, for all their efforts in organising the Iran Tribunal, \u2018human rights\u2019 commissions and so on, they seem to have been outmanoeuvred, thanks to a small concession from the supreme leader. Ironically the jubilation following the election of a centrist lacking the imprimatur of the supreme leader is being used to demonstrate the regime\u2019s adaptability.<\/p>\n

As I have said time and time again to former comrades deluded by western contributions to their NGOs, for all its talk of \u2018human rights\u2019, \u2018women\u2019s rights\u2019 and latterly even \u2018workers\u2019 rights\u2019, imperialism\u2019s first choice in Iran will always be to reach a solution with the existing regime. If this election has one consequence, it will be a period of renewed \u2018negotiations\u2019 and a substantial reduction in regime change funds at least for the next few years, and that in itself is not a bad outcome. On the negative side it is easy to predict how, like Khatami and Rafsanjani, Rowhani will act like the grand old Duke of York, failing to live up to any of his promises, while buying time for the Islamic regime.<\/p>\n

Who is Rowhani?<\/h4>\n

Unlike Khatami, Iran\u2019s last \u2018reformist\u2019 president, Rowhani is very much an insider of the regime who has held crucial posts since 1979, including membership of the Assembly of Experts (the body which selects and oversees the role of the supreme leader) since 1999, the Expediency Council (the administrative assembly appointed by the supreme leader) since 1991, and the Supreme National Security Council since 1989. Throughout the last 21 years he has also held a semi-academic post as head of the Centre for Strategic Research.<\/p>\n

After attending a religious seminary, he studied law at the University of Tehran, continuing his studies later in Glasgow Caledonian University where in 1995 he gained an MPhil (his thesis was entitled \u2018The Islamic legislative power with reference to the Iranian experience\u2019), and in 1999 a PhD. In Tehran there are rumours that he speaks English with a Scottish accent – one young blogger has been ending his posts with the phrase, \u201cBeam me up, Scotty\u201d.<\/p>\n

Rowhani\u2019s alleged involvement in Irangate during the Iran-Iraq war came about because he was a member of the Supreme Defence Council (1982-88) and deputy commander of the war (1983-85), a close ally of Rafsanjani and already part of a faction later labelled \u2018moderates\u2019. During the second term of Khatami\u2019s presidency, Rowhani was Iran\u2019s chief nuclear negotiator, so it was no surprise that in an election campaign dominated by foreign policy, sanctions and their effect on the economy, he boasted about his skills as a negotiator. In one TV debate he said: \u201cIn my time we held talks with presidents and ministers\u201d – it was Rowhani who invited Jack Straw to visit Iran, for instance. By comparison, his rival, Jalili, was reduced to talking to \u2018managers\u2019 and low-ranking officials.<\/p>\n

Other candidates pointed out that, for all his desire for accommodation with the US, soon after he and Khatami supported western efforts in the Afghan war the Bush administration labelled Iran one of the axes of evil. During this time he was given the nickname, \u2018diplomatic sheikh\u2019, and he wrote his memoirs of the period in a book entitled National security and nuclear diplomacy<\/em>. He will need all his diplomatic training to deal with the conservative-dominated majles (Islamic parliament) and the supreme leader.<\/p>\n

Campaign<\/h4>\n

The presidential elections started badly. Iran\u2019s supreme leader had fallen out with his chosen president, Ahmadinejad, in the first months of his second term and had considered abolishing the post of president altogether. However, he was advised against this, as such a move would produce constitutional complications, so Khamenei\u2019s initial reaction was to reduce the importance of the post.<\/p>\n

Those who watched with dismay the TV quiz show style of the first round of presidential debates could not help thinking this was a deliberate act to make a mockery of the elections. The first debate between the eight vetted candidates who had been given the nod by the Guardian Council was compared to a kindergarten game. The presidential hopefuls were asked to answer \u2018yes\u2019 or \u2018no\u2019 to complicated questions about the economy and foreign policy. Many refused, and the whole thing descended into farce. The second debate was no better and it was only in the last debate, just days before the vote, that candidates were allowed to challenge their opponents directly. Clearly by that time the regime was trying to inject some life into the process and by all accounts Rowhani was the winner of that third TV debate. He opposed the regime\u2019s intransigent stance on its nuclear industry and advocated negotiations to lift sanctions and improve the economy.<\/p>\n

At a time of economic hardship and political isolation, slogans such as \u201cSave Iran\u2019s economy\u201d and \u201cReconciliation with the world\u201d made him a popular figure. Then there was: \u201cI have always been against radicalism. I have always followed moderation\u201d; and \u201cI have never acted as if in a garrison\u201d; and the slightly more obscure: \u201cCentrifuges should spin, but so should industries and people\u2019s livelihoods.\u201d<\/p>\n

He was not the only one mocking the approach of Iran\u2019s nuclear negotiator, Jalili, to the 5+1 talks. Velayati, Qalibaf and Rezaii expressed similar views. Following the elections, Rowhani said that the nuclear enrichment programme would continue. However, there were \u201cmany ways to build trust\u201d with the west, and it was important for Iran to show that \u201cits activities fall within the framework of international rules\u201d.<\/p>\n

International reaction<\/h4>\n

Rowhani\u2019s election has been cautiously welcomed by European countries, by the G8 and by most Middle Eastern countries with the exception of Israel. US president Barack Obama summed up the US position on June 18: \u201cWe may be able to move forward on a dialogue that allows us to resolve the problems with Iran\u2019s nuclear programme.\u201d<\/p>\n

Having said that, any serious negotiation will face major obstacles. To start with, the current US-Iran conflict has two parties, so conciliatory noises from Iran alone will not lead to a resolution. At a time of economic crisis, the continuation of conflict with Iran has political as well as economic benefits for any US administration. Powerful voices in Washington, as well as in the pro-Israeli lobby, still want complete regime change, even a partition of Iran.<\/p>\n

In addition there is the issue of Syria. Hours after the results were announced, the Syrian National Coalition called on Rowhani to review Iran\u2019s support for the Assad regime. The \u201cCoalition believes that it is its duty to call on the new president of Iran to rectify the mistakes made by the Iranian leadership.\u201d<\/p>\n

Rowhani is unlikely to oblige. Like the rest of the Shia clergy, he considers defending the current Syrian regime and Hezbollah an integral part of Iran\u2019s foreign policy. While warning western powers against intervention, Iran has, of course intervened. Rowhani will face popular opposition over this, however. During Saturday\u2019s celebrations crowds in Tehran and Kermanshah were shouting: \u201cLeave Syria alone – deal with our problems\u201d.<\/p>\n

Coincidentally, on June 18, four days after the elections, Iran\u2019s national football team defeated South Korea to qualify for the World Cup in 2014. This prompted further celebrations which quickly turned political in major cities. One of the main slogans was a call for the release of all political prisoners and an end to the house arrest of Moussavi and Karroubi. However, even if we accept claims made by some that Iran\u2019s football win was linked to Rowhani\u2019s victory, he will need to perform bigger miracles to get all Iran\u2019s politician prisoners released.<\/p>\n

On hearing the results of Iran\u2019s elections, comrade Mike Macnair commented that after decades of repression and the terrible situation of the last few years, this could have the effect of a \u201ccrack in the dam\u201d: ie, a trickle of concessions could lead to a flood. Revolutionary forces in Iran will certainly hope he is right, but the fear is that once more false hope generated by the promises of the centrist-\u2018reformist\u2019 coalition will actually lengthen the life of the Islamic dictatorship. While there might be some relaxation in the interference of the religious state in the private lives of Iranians, poverty, unemployment, exploitation, the absence of basic workers\u2019 rights, political repression – all look set to continue for the foreseeable future.<\/p>\n

We are still a very long way from a resolution of the nuclear conflict and sanctions look likely to continue. Even if they were lifted tomorrow, it would take months, if not years, for the economy to return to some sort of normality. In the meantime, prices remain high and there is a serious shortage of basic foodstuffs and medicines.<\/p>\n

The Iranian workers\u2019 and democratic movement will continue to need international working class solidarity and we in Hands Off the People of Iran will do our utmost to show how this can be achieved.<\/p>\n

yassamine.mather@weeklyworker.co.uk<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Notes<\/h4>\n

<\/a>1. All data from Iran\u2019s ministry of information, reported at www.presstv.ir\/detail\/2013\/06\/15\/309098\/rohani-far-ahead-in-poll-results-so-far<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/a>2. www.rahekarge.de<\/a> 18 June 2013.\t\t<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

On Friday June 14, Iranians voted in large numbers for ayatollah Hassan Rowhani, a regime insider who was elected as Iran\u2019s president with 50.71% of the vote. A centrist, not a \u2018reformist\u2019, he became the candidate of an unofficial coalition between \u2018reformists\u2019 and \u2018centrists\u2019 forged three days before the vote, after green leader and former … <\/p>\n

Continue reading “Iran election: Not a victory for progressives”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2471","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-articles","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2471","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2471"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2471\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2471"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2471"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hopoi.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2471"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}