Iran’s New Revolution, battle of the giants?
by Cyril Widdershoven

The last elections in Iran have been regarded as the end of the old guard. The defeat of almost all conservative candidates was seen as the end of Khomeinism, the end of the rule of Ayatollahs, Bazaaris and Khamenei. The unexpected huge victory of progressive and pro-democracy candidates, all over the country, showed the willingness of the Iranian voters, especially the young and educated, to have change. Democracy, freedom of press, freedom of unions, liberalization of the economy and the engagement of Iran with the West were hot items in the elections. President Khatami, by most observers seen as the proponent of liberalization and democratic forces, could now at last implement in full all necessary changes he promised in his last election campaign. However, reality is hard and most of the times the opposite of the expected. Conservative forces in Iran hit back. The Revolutionary Guards, the conservative elite and almost all leading Shiite mullahs reacted in a very hard way. 12 reformist and liberal newspapers were banned. Several election results in the capital Teheran and around the country were declared un-submissible. Leading Ayatollahs were quoted in the Iranian media stating that the Islamic Revolution is under threat, that Iran should not engage in discussions with the old Satan USA and that if necessary, the rule of the Ayatollahs would be re-implemented in full. The question that is now on all minds is what is the position of President Khatami and were does this counter-revolutionary attempt end.

The fate of President Mohammed Khatami’s mildly reformist regime in Iran has become the most urgent question that US policymakers have put their military and intelligence experts in recent weeks, as quoted in the Herald Tribune (5/5/2000). Some US experts see a creeping coup d’etat by hard-line mullahs that will soon weaken or topple Khatami. Others think that he is rapidly overtaken on his left by the demand for greater personal freedom.

As the domestic political situation is still unclear, it is hard to predict where it will go. Iran’s sixth parliament is still undecided in its composition. Results for Teheran’s 30 seats have not yet been released. Interior Minister Abdolvahed Musavi-Lari announced on 11 May that he hopes the results will be announced before convening. Intra-governmental disagreements over this issue have become heated, and there are demands both for annulment of the Teheran vote as well as for an immediate announcement of the results. The Guardians Council, the reactionary conservative bastion of Iran’s politics, announced on 7 May that there were discrepancies in almost 80 percent of the 577 Teheran ballot boxes that had been recounted so far. Only 133 boxes contained no errors. Teheran Province Governor-General Mohammed Reza Ayatollahi responded by stating there were no mistakes made intentionally and that the number of votes cast by underage voters was too small to have any meaningful impact. Guardian Council Secretary Jannati however told state television on 9 May that the recount would continue until all doubts were eliminated. He did not rule out a change in the lower half of the 30 seats or even a complete change of all 30 seats. Jannati explained that a total recount was being conducted to eliminate suspicions that actions were being taken to ensure a seat for candidate Ali-Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, who had come in 30^th place.  These delays however are becoming a major focal point of discussion and resentment in Iran. Parliamentarian Mohammad Javad Larijani said that “only the cancellation of the Teheran elections could clean the shame of the election officials.” Related to this conflict, the uncertainty created by the delays in announcing the results have brought the Teheran bazaar to a near standstill, “Ham-Mihan” reported on 7 May. Larger transactions, from 10 million rials upward, have been particularly hard-hit, and most transactions are in the 30-40,000 rial range. It is feared that this could lead to bankruptcy for smaller traders. Parliamentary-elect Rasul Montjabnia states “annulment can lead to a real ugly aftermath.” Student-leader Heshmatollah Tabarzadi said “If the Guardian Council annuls the Teheran elections, we will definitely break silence and take to the streets in protests – and to defend our constitutional and legitimate rights.”

All of the above, in combination with the ongoing confrontation between reformists and conservatives, will have its impact on the position of President Khatami.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s Friday Prayer sermon on 12 May added greater detail to the ongoing struggle. Khamenei stated that the Iranian people chose Islam as the model for their country, and religion will always be a part of the system. He also called for greater national and political unity to achieve the original goals of the Islamic revolution.  Khamenei said that Iran chose Islam, and with that model came specific values. The value of freedom of opinion and expression however did not mean that Iran “would follow a foreign culture blindly.” “The revolution is dynamic. It involves constant evolution and moving forward.” He called on the people to safeguard the values and view them as a single entity. In other words, one cannot have economic and cultural independence but ignore the Islamic values. In another statement, he warned that “those who are immersed in religious values and who fail to see the importance of change and development threaten to become reactionary. These very lackeys who were totally devoted to the former regime are chanting reforms. What sort of reforms do they want? Their reforms are American reforms. They say that the Iranian nation … should reform its ways and should allow the American masters to return to our country and to take control of our economy, our culture and our social affairs….they are infiltrators, they are aliens and strangers.” All his sermon was again focusing on national unity and defense against outside interference. Viewed in the context of disagreement about the parliamentary elections, Khamenei may be seeking to reassure both hard-liners and conservatives that even if reformers dominate the legislature, revolutionary priorities will not be forsaken.

The above has put immense constraints on President Khatami’s position and performance the last weeks. He is now seeking to play the role of Bismarck in 19th Century Germany, by playing his connections in the religious camp, tossing around with democratic and reformist parties but keeping his hands clean and without blame. In how far, he will be able to keep the peace is disputable. Iran’s political constellation is not used to very open discussions. Low conflict confrontations will have the possibility to put more oil on the fire, probably resulting in huge mass demonstrations on the streets. The last student demonstrations have shown that reactionary forces are not scared to take all available measures to quell the opposition into subversion. The democratic forces are also not anymore seeking a totally peace full approach to get their rights and demands heard. Violent confrontations have to be expected. As Jim Hoagland already stated in his article in the Herald Tribune, zags as his foes zig, leaving the experts arguing. The revolution rolls on, looking for a new balance if not a new direction, and a new set of winners and losers. Khatami could become the last victim in the list started by Shah Reza Pahlavi. Who will take over the helm is unknown. Rafsanjani, who has been regarded by the West for years as a progressive and democratic politician has again shown his colors, the colors of a wolf in sheep clothes, he joined the extremist conservative factions. New young democratic leaders are however not to be seen. All favorites are either shot, killed or imprisoned. No new blood has emerged until now. Iran is approaching a deadlock, from which the only way out will be a full-fledged open conflict, like the old days. Iran’s position in the region, very much improved via its open contacts with all GCC states, its conciliatory approach to vital issues with Qatar, the UAE and Kuwait, will be under pressure. American/Western support for democratization should be in the open, not anymore focusing on one leader (Yeltsin’s history in Russia should have taught the West something) but for all political forces of the reformist parties. It will be now possible to decide Iran’s future. The Arab states also should involve themselves in the process. Forget the historical conflict between Sunni and Shi'a, forget the battles between Arab states and Iran, but approach the possibilities from a political social point, with an open mind and flexible.

Reprinted with permission of the author. mideastinfo.com makes no claim to copyrights.
Reprinted as submitted.