Page 1 of 2 Ahmadinejad and Bush: Mirror men
By Stephen Zunes
This past Wednesday, I was among a group of American religious leaders and
scholars who met with Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad in New York. In what
was billed as an inter-faith dialogue, we frankly shared our strong opposition
to certain Iranian government policies and provocative statements made by the
Iranian president. At the same time, we avoided the insulting language employed
by Columbia University president Lee Bollinger before a public audience two
days earlier.
The Iranian president was quite unimpressive. Indeed, with his
ramblings and the superficiality of his analysis, he came across as more
pathetic than evil.
The more respectful posture of our group that morning led to a more open
exchange of views. Before an audience largely composed of Christian clergy, he
reminded us that we worship the same God, have been inspired by many of the
same prophets, and share similar values of peace, justice and reconciliation.
The Iranian president impressed me as someone sincerely devout in his religious
faith, yet rather superficial in his understanding and inclined to twist his
faith tradition in ways to correspond with his pre-conceived ideological
positions. He was rather evasive when it came to specific questions and was not
terribly coherent, relying more on platitudes than analysis, and would tend to
get his facts wrong. In short, he reminded me in many respects of President
George W Bush.
Both Ahmadinejad and Bush have used their fundamentalist interpretations of
their faith traditions to place the world in a Manichean perspective of good
versus evil. The certitude of their positions regardless of evidence to the
contrary, their sense that they are part of a divine mission, and their largely
successful manipulation of their devoutly religious constituents have put these
two nations on a dangerous confrontational course.
Ahmadinejad can get away with it because he is president of a theocratic
political system that allows very limited freedoms and opportunities for public
debate. We have no such excuse here in the United States, however, for the
strong bipartisan support for Bush's righteous anti-Iranian crusade, most
recently illustrated by a series of provocative anti-Iranian measures recently
passed by an overwhelming margin of the Democratic-controlled Congress.
There are many differences between the two men, of course. Perhaps the most
significant is that, unlike Bush, Ahmadinejad has very little political power,
particularly in the areas of military and foreign policy. So why, given
Ahmadinejad's lack of real political power, was so much made of his annual trip
to the opening session of the UN General Assembly?
Ahmadinejad's political weakness
The president of Iran is constitutionally weak. The real power in Iran lies in
the hands of Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other conservative Shi'ite
clerics on the Council of Guardians. Just as they were able to stifle the
reformist agenda of Ahmadinejad's immediate predecessor, Mohammed Khatami, they
have similarly thwarted the radical agenda of the current president, whom they
view as something of a loose cannon.
Furthermore, Ahmadinejad's influence is waning. The new head of the Iranian
Revolutionary Guard Corps, Ali Jafari, is from a conservative sub-faction
opposed to the more radical elements allied with Ahmadinejad. He replaced the
former guard head, Yahya Rahim-Safavi, who was apparently seen as too openly
sympathetic to the president. In addition, former president and Ahmadinejad
rival, Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani was recently elected to head the powerful
Experts' Assembly, defeating Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, who was backed by
Ahmadinejad supporters and other hardliners.
Ahmadinejad's election in 2005 was not evidence of a turn to the right by the
Iranian electorate. The clerical leadership's restrictions on who could run
made it nearly impossible for any real reformist to emerge as a presidential
contender. Ahmadinejad's opponent in the runoff election was the 70-year-old
Rafsanjani, who was seen as a corrupt representative of the political
establishment. The fact that he had become a millionaire while in government
overshadowed his modest reform agenda. By contrast, Ahmadinejad, the relatively
young Tehran mayor, focused on the plight of the poor and cleaning up
corruption.
As a result, Iranian voters were forced to choose between two flawed
candidates. The relatively liberal contender came across as an out-of-touch
elitist, and his ultraconservative opponent was able to assemble a coalition of
rural, less-educated and fundamentalist voters to conduct a pseudo-populist
campaign based on promoting morality and value-centered leadership. In short,
it bore some resemblance to the presidential election in the United States one
year earlier.
Under Ahmadinejad's leadership, the level of corruption and the economic
situation for most Iranians has actually worsened. As a result, in addition to
losing the backing of the clerical leadership, he has lost much of his base and
his popularity has plummeted. In municipal elections last December,
Ahmadinejad's slates lost heavily to moderate conservatives and reformers. Why,
then, is all this attention being given to a relatively powerless lame duck
president of a Third World country?
Part of the reason may be that highlighting Ahmadinejad's extremist views and
questioning his mental stability helps convince millions of Americans that if
Iran develops an atomic bomb, it will immediately use it against the United
States or an ally such as Israel. With more than 200 nuclear weapons and
advanced missile capabilities, Israel has more than enough deterrent capability
to prevent an Iranian attack. Obviously, American deterrent capabilities are
even greater. However, if you depict Iran's leader as crazy, it puts nuclear
deterrence in question and helps create an excuse for the United States or
Israel to launch a preventive war prior to Iran developing a nuclear weapons
capability.
In reality, though, the Iranian president is not commander-in-chief of the
armed forces, so Ahmadinejad would be incapable of
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
