|
|
|
|
Bush's
imprint
By B Raman
The
unexpected good showing of conservative Mahmud
Ahmadinejad, a former mayor of Tehran, in the
first round of Iran's presidential elections last
week, by coming in second with 19.5% of the votes
polled, as against 21% for the favorite Ayatollah
Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, throws open the
possibility that in the second and final round on
Friday, which will be confined to the two men,
Ahmadinejad may emerge the winner, thereby belying
all pre-poll predictions by Iranian as well as
foreign analysts. During the week preceding the
polls there were indications of increasing support
for Ahmadinejad, but nobody anticipated such a
spectacular showing.
The respectably high
turnout (more than 63% of eligible voters), though
not as high as in the previous presidential
elections, and the spectacular showing of
Ahmadinejad, who was considered the closest to
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei among all
the candidates in the first round, has taken
observers of the Iranian political scene by
surprise.
Among the reasons attributed for
the high turnout and support for Ahmadinejad is
the anger caused among large sections of the
population by what was perceived as the blatant
efforts of the George W Bush administration to
interfere in Iran's internal affairs through
stepped-up broadcasts and telecasts to the people
to stay away from the voting as a protest against
an alleged lack of democracy.
The
broadcasts and the telecasts sought to create
doubts in the minds of the people about the
fairness of the elections and the credibility of
the electoral process. They were made from Prague
and relayed by clandestine relaying stations in
the United Arab Emirates, Iraq and Pakistan.
Explosions in the days preceding the polls in the
Arab areas of Khuzestan near the border with Iraq
and in Tehran itself were seen by the people as
instigated by US intelligence agencies to
destabilize Iran. The voting in the first round is
thus seen as a firm message sent by the voters to
the US to mind its business and not interfere in
the internal affairs of Iran.
If the Bush
administration does not draw the right lessons and
continues with its provocative
broadcasts/telecasts and actions in the days
preceding the second round, it may face the
mortification of seeing a strongly anti-US
ultraconservative, who played a role in the
1979-80 decision to storm the US Embassy and take
American diplomats as hostages, elected as the
next president of Iran - not because the people
support his views, but because they feel it is the
only way of teaching a lesson to the US.
In an analysis of the pre-poll scene in an
issue of Iran Focus published from London, its
editor, Amir Ali Nourbakhsh, highlighted the
following significant features of the scene:
Fading of religious aspects. Unlike
eight years ago, none of the conservative
candidates was using religious orthodoxy as a
strong campaigning tool. Only a few Islamic
principles were being used by candidates to
attract voters. Apart from Rafsanjani, none of the
conservative candidates is a cleric.
Dissociation from the past. Most of the
political forces with radical social views were
trying not to express their attitudes directly or
were dissociating themselves from traditionally
radical parties.
Signs of moderation. The majority of
conservative forces were using moderate slogans
similar to those expressed by outgoing President
Mohammad Khatami.
Good governance as a source of
legitimacy. Political groups were chanting
slogans about a powerful and capable government.
Both conservatives and reformists were implying
that Khatami's failures were the result of his
personal weaknesses and not those of the
constitution. Reformists were trying to create the
impression that there is still hope for change
from within.
Personal politics fading. The Iranians
(even the conservative sections) were paying more
attention to what the politicians were saying
rather than relying on their revolutionary record.
Economic slogans were starting to play a role in
the election campaign.
Ali's article
projected the various scenarios that were likely
to emerge from the elections. In none of these
scenarios did Ahmadinejad figure as a strong
contender. It characterized him as
"value-oriented, xenophobic, strict
socio-political beliefs, in favor of a
state-controlled economy and against the IMF
[International Monetary Fund] and the World Bank"
and Rafsanjani as "an independent thinker,
flexible, in favor of detente, open, but would
compromise social freedoms with radical forces
over economic issues, open on economic issues in
favor of privatization and foreign direct
investment".
Ahmadinejad's steady rise
Following the success of the Islamic
revolution in 1979, the 49-year-old Ahmadinejad,
who holds a doctorate in engineering from the Iran
University of Science and Technology, became a
member of the Office for Strengthening Unity and
reportedly supported the decision of its central
committee to storm the US Embassy in Tehran and
take American diplomats as hostages. In fact, it
is said that he wanted the students to raid the
then Soviet Embassy too, but the central committee
did not agree.
He subsequently became an
officer of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards and
rose to be a senior commander. His
responsibilities in the Guards reportedly included
countering the activities of political dissidents
in Iran and those of the Mujahideen-e-Khalq, which
had started a terrorist movement against the
Islamic government from sanctuaries in France and
Iraq. He was considered a leading
counter-terrorism expert of the Guards. Sources in
the Iranian exiles community in the West allege
that he was also given the responsibility for the
execution of the fatwa for the
assassination of Salman Rushdie, the Indian-born
British author. The execution of the fatwa
has since been suspended.
Ahmadinejad
served as governor-general of Ardebil province in
northwest Iran during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War.
He also became a member of the right-wing
Association of Engineers and of the central
council of the Society of the Devotees of the
Islamic Revolution.
He also served as a
senior adviser to the minister of Culture and
Islamic Guidance. He was elected as the mayor of
Tehran in March 2004, a post from which he
resigned before filing his nomination for the
presidential elections. On taking up his post as
mayor he said, "I hope I can use my reputation in
achieving justice. I do not believe in
shotgun-retribution, but some managers will
inevitably be changed. The new managers will be
selected on personal criteria, and whoever doesn't
meet the mark must go. You can only be a manager
to the extent that you work for the people, and
that will be my criteria for selecting my
managers. Recommendations are false misgivings. I
will not give weight to anyone's advice during my
term as mayor. Some may be displeased with this
course of action, but the people's trust is gained
only through dedication to justice."
He
also said: "Piety, virtue, candor, efficiency and
trustworthiness will be the criteria on which my
managers will be selected and this has nothing to
do with settling political scores. The mayor's
office must be cleansed of corrupt managers and
shady monetary and administrative practices. When
these visions are put into effect in the next
couple of months, Tehran's municipality will bear
witness to profound changes in scores of
managerial positions, ranging from deputies to
managing directors of the municipality's
affiliated companies. These managers will be
replaced by a host of new faces as the first step
toward cleansing a city that is long overdue for a
makeover."
As the mayor of Tehran,
Ahmadinejad improved the public transportation
system but made enemies among the liberals by
converting many cultural centers in the capital
into mosques or other religious centers. He made a
distinction between Islamic democracy and
Western-style liberal democracy and strongly
rejected the latter. He used to say, "We did not
have a revolution in order to have democracy."
His views on the policies he would follow
if elected president, as expressed by him during
his election campaign, are given in the following
sub-paragraphs:
Domestic
policy: "If elected, I would implement
development projects on the basis of justice and
the wishes of the people. Political, cultural and
economic developments are not isolated from each
other and at the very core of all of them is
justice and public consensus. Among my priorities
are removing the problems of the youth related to
employment, housing and marriage. My idea of
political development is different from its
foreign interpretation. We must expand freedoms
quantitatively and qualitatively, and determine
ways in which freedoms could be used. The way we
have been dealing with the youth on the streets
does not solve anything."
Foreign
policy: "The foreign policy of the
Islamic Republic of Iran is in principle based on
the establishment of peace and justice worldwide.
For this reason, the expansion of relations with
all countries is on the agenda of the Islamic
Republic of Iran. I mean balanced relationships,
based on mutual respect and observance of each
other's rights. There are very few countries that
fall outside this scope. If they do, it is due to
their blind approach to the Islamic republic. Of
course, there are hierarchies in the diplomacy. In
these echelons, we give priority to the
establishment of relations with our immediate
neighbors, then with countries that once fell
within the zone of Iran's civilization, then with
Muslim states and finally, with all countries that
are not hostile towards the Islamic Republic of
Iran. We desire an expansion of relations with
regional states and the establishment of extensive
public contacts. We believe that visa quotas
should be lifted and people should visit anywhere
they wish freely. People should have freedom in
their pilgrimages and tours."
Relations with the US: "I
meet ambassadors from European, African and Asian
countries once a week. Iran does not need imposed
ties with the United States. When the world formed
a united front to fight Iran, our oil could not
sell on the international markets and our economy
was paralyzed [due to the 1980-88 war imposed by
Saddam Hussein's Iraq], the nation did not extend
its hand [to outsiders] for help. Now that we have
managed to build the infrastructure [for
development] and the country has progressed, we do
not need to accept any imposed relationship with
America. The US severed its ties with the Islamic
Republic to harm the Iranian nation and so do
those who favor resumption of ties with the US."
UN reforms: "Global
equations undergo changes, this is their nature.
Today, the Muslim world is the poorest of the
global powers. The UN structure is one-sided,
stacked against the world of Islam. The Muslim
world should be allowed a chance in the UN
Security Council, where certain groups now
possesses the right to veto. We consider this
privilege essentially wrong. It is not just for a
few states to sit and veto global approvals.
Should such a privilege continue to exist, the
Muslim world with a population of nearly 1.5
billion should be extended the same privilege."
Nuclear energy: "This
subject has been given a tremendous amount of
publicity. It is a critical subject. Nuclear
energy is the scientific achievement of the
Iranian nation. Our youth have crowned themselves
with this achievement, via domestic technology and
by reliance on their own knowledge. The energy
belongs to the Iranian nation. Definitely, the
progress of a nation cannot be obstructed.
Scientific, medical and technical development of
our nation is necessary. I believe there are
certain individuals that create a false mood. They
want to portray the situation as critical, while
there is no crisis here. The technology is at the
disposal of the Iranian nation. Certain powers do
not want to believe this. They resist against
accepting such a right, such an achievement of the
Iranian nation. Their scientists and experts have
admitted that the Iranian nation is entitled to
this right. I believe the problem can be solved
with prudence and wisdom, by utilizing opportunity
and relying on the endless power of the Iranian
nation, through our self-confidence. The ongoing
artificial mood is political sleight of hand. The
mood aims to influence the Islamic Republic's
domestic developments.
"One cannot impede
scientific progress. You can see scientific
progress everywhere in the world. One cannot
obstruct this movement. This is not something that
can be prevented with an order. No one can deprive
the Iranian nation of this right. They are vainly
trying to stir conditions worldwide. They want to
fan tension, create crisis to meet their
transitory objectives. That's a kind of
psychological war. This is as if you want to
deprive someone of industrial progress. This is
something impossible. Industry is intertwined with
the nature of an individual. Technical knowledge
has now become an integral aspect of the Iranian
psyche. You cannot say that the Iranian nation
should not use math, should not have physicians,
should not build large dams, or should not be able
to build a refinery or a plane. This is an
illogical claim; no one accepts it. Fortunately,
the world has seen this. God willing, these few
arrogant powers will accept it as well. We have
relations with governments and nations. The basis
of those engagements is guaranteeing and
respecting each other's national identities.
Iran's present status in the field of nuclear
energy is indigenous and it has been gained
without reliance upon foreigners."
Threats to Iran: "The system
of domination is founded on depriving nations of
their true identity. It seeks to deprive nations
of their culture, identity, self-confidence and in
this way dominate them. Our dear country, Iran,
throughout history has been subject to threats.
These were due to its advantages and geopolitical
conditions as well as the capacity of the great
Iranian nation. The Iranian nation for a long
period of time has been the architect of
civilization and the standard bearer for science,
technology, culture, literature, arts, math,
medicine, philosophy, astronomy, and the like. It
still holds these standards. It continues to hold
the banner of independence and freedom. These
threats, however, are not of recent origin. These
threats have been with us for a long time. Our
enemies can deal a blow to us any time they wish.
They do not wait for permission to do this. They
do not deal a blow with prior notice. They did not
take action because they can't. Our nation is
today a powerful nation. Fortunately, Iranians are
politically active worldwide. For hundreds of
years Iranians have been migrating to many parts
of the world. They took Islamic culture to other
parts of the world and established it there. Now
too, Iranians have a wide-scale influence in the
world. They have strong cultural, scientific,
political and economic influence. The presence of
an Iranian elite, outstanding figures in many
parts of the world is a precious asset for the
Iranian nation. Iranians defend and present their
Islamic and Iranian identity to other people
worldwide."
Islam: "We want
to make a good impression so that other nations
know what path to take. This is the Prophet's
promise. This is what will happen. There will be a
global state of Islam."
Even now,
Rafsanjani is tipped to win in the second round.
If he does not and if Ahmadinejad wins, he would
have reason to thank Bush for his unexpected
victory.
If Ahmadinejad wins, there could
be two implications for India. First, the US
opposition to the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India gas
pipeline could harden. Second, Pakistan would have
reasons for satisfaction if Ahmadinejad carries
through his promised policy of working for the
election of an Islamic nation as a permanent
member of the UN Security Council. In recent
months, President General Pervez Musharraf and
Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz have been traveling
extensively in Asia, Australia and New Zealand.
One of the purposes of their travel is to canvass
support for the Pakistani view that there is no
need for the expansion of the permanent
membership. However, if it is going to be
expanded, an Islamic nation should be included and
Indonesia, with the largest Muslim population in
the world, should be the right candidate as a
representative of the Islamic as well as the
developing worlds. Musharraf and Aziz have
reportedly been arguing that giving representation
to the Islamic world would soften the anti-West
feelings of the Muslims.
B Raman
is additional secretary (retired), Cabinet
Secretariat, government of India, New Delhi, and,
presently, director, Institute for Topical
Studies, Chennai, and distinguished fellow and
convener, Observer Research Foundation, Chennai
Chapter. E-mail: itschen36@gmail.com
(Copyright 2005 B Raman)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
|
|
|
