Latest ArticlesArchivesForumsRSS FeedGuestbookContact UsSearch


Iran Press Service (logo)


As of January 2009, this site is definitely closed, but you can follow Safa Haeri on his new blog: DAMAVAND at http://wwwdamavandsafa.blogspot.com

Iran's New Purge Slapping the "Moderates"

Published Sunday, January 27, 2008



New York     Opponents of taking a tough line on Iran have always claimed that imposing sanctions (not to mention threatening military action) would strengthen the Islamic Republic's most radical elements. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice looks to have bought that argument. Last week, she agreed to water down the new sanctions that her advisers had devised against the Islamic Republic.

Waving an olive branch, Rice also called for a peaceful resolution of the dispute over Tehran's illicit nuclear ambitions.

Nearly all the denied applicants belong to the 21 groups designated by Western observers as "reformist" .

Events inside Iran, however, provide a different picture. The Council of the Guardians of the Constitution, a 12-man committee of mollahs and their legal advisers, this week rejected applications from nearly 4,000 men and women to run in the March 14 general election. Nearly all the denied applicants belong to the 21 groups designated by Western observers as "reformist" opponents of the ultra-radical President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The list of the rejected reads like a Who's-Who of politicians regarded by many in the West as "moderates" who would put the regime on a less confrontational trajectory.

It includes individuals who served under Presidents Hashemi Rafsanjani and Mohammad Khatami, as well as scores of former members of the Islamic Consultative Assembly (Majles), the 290-seat ersatz parliament set up by Ayatollah Rouhollah Khomeini in 1980.

In what looks like a massive purge, a total of 103 members of the present Majles, all critics of Ahmadinejad, were also declared "unfit" for re-election.

To be sure, the so-called reformists have never proposed any reform program as such. Rafsanjani spent most of his eight years as president building his business empire; Khatami spent his tenure traveling the world and building his image as an amateur philosopher working for "a dialogue of civilizations".

More regime opponents were killed or thrown into prison under Rafsanjani and Khatami than under Ahmadinejad. And both "reformers" tried to export the Khomeinist revolution via agents and clients in many Muslim countries, especially in the Middle East.

Mohammad Khatami
During his eight years in office, former president Mohammad Khatami was not able to implement major points of his promised reforms

Indeed, both also used the trick of excluding opponents from electoral lists. In 2004, when Khatami was president, more than two-thirds of applicants were blacklisted.

What differentiated the two men from Ahmadinejad was their penchant for taqiyeh (dissimulation) - an old trick of the mullahs who have turned speaking with a forked tongue into fine art.

Ahmadinejad, by contrast, shuns taqiyeh. What is on his tongue comes from his heart. He firmly believes that his brand of Islam stands on the threshold of victory against a corrupt, weak, fat and cowardly West led by a deeply divided United States.

The West's soft line so far has persuaded many Iranians that Ahmadinejad may be right after all. Far from benefiting the so-called moderates, the cuddly policy (preached by the likes of European Union foreign-policy czar Javier Solana) has strengthened the Ahmadinejad-led radicals. After all, the man is thumbing his nose at all the great powers and superpowers - and getting away with it. Why abandon a winner and side with people who've always looked like losers?

Having captured the presidency and the Council of Ministers that goes with it, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is now determined to storm other centers of power, starting with the Majles. It has put one of its own, Gen. Alireza Afshar, in charge of organizing the elections, with other Guard officers heading electoral commissions across the country.

"Until recently they just wanted a majority", says Nasser Abdallahzadeh, one of the rejected hopefuls. "Now they want every single seat."

Ahmadinejad firmly believes that his brand of Islam stands on the threshold of victory against a corrupt, weak, fat and cowardly West .

Even then, Ahmadinejad has taken care to reduce the powers of the Majles. In a letter published last week, he told the speaker of the Majles that the ersatz parliament has no authority to force the government to change its policies. That is, that it's there simply to rubber-stamp the executive's every decision.

The speaker, Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, found the letter so insulting that he complained to his father-in-law, "Supreme Guide" Ali Khamenehei. After several days of hesitation, Khamenehei responded with a letter that sounded like a mild rebuke for Ahmadinejad and a vague assertion of the rights of the Majles.

But even that was too much for Ahmadinejad, who responded by saying that such epistolary exercises wouldn't affect his government. "The government will continue doing what is best for Islam," he asserted.

What will the so-called moderates and reformists do now that they have little chance of gaining a foothold in the Majles? The decent response would be a boycott of an exercise that no longer has any real sense. Why vote in an election, when the winners have already been chosen in the shady corridors of power?

The trouble is that the "moderates" and "reformists" of the Khomeinist camp lack the courage of their pretensions. They resemble the happy cuckold who remains faithful to his marriage bond under all circumstances.

This is how Mohammad-Reza Aref, a former "first assistant president" under Khatami and now the principal spokesman of the "reformists" has reacted to his own blacklisting and that of virtually all his associates: "We might decide not to field any candidates," he said. "But we shall not call for a boycott of the elections, because we do not wish to harm the regime. We want the people to vote knowing that we have no candidates. In this way, everyone would know that we are not responsible for things. We will protest, but won't make a big noise."

Aref, Rafsanjani, Khatami: These are the guys that Rice, hoodwinked by her advisers, seems to be banking on to bring the Islamic Republic back to reason. With enemies like that, Ahmadinejad needs no friends. ENDS US SUPPORT 27108

Editor’s note: Mr. Amir Taheri is a leading Iranian journalist, commentator, political analyst and author, writing for many international media.

This article was published by The New York Post on 26 January 2008
Highlights are by IPS
 

 

Comments

3 comment(s) on this page. Add your own comment below.

Neema
Wednesday, January 30, 2008 23:19 [ 1 ]

Dear Mr. Taheri:

I join you in calling that a general boycott of the elections would send a strong message to the Iranian government that the vetting process they have in place for the candidates is outdated and needs revisions. People should have the right to compete in free and open elections, where the people decide who will represent them.

The issue I have with your article is that once again, instead of looking towards Iranians to solve Iranian issues, you look for help from the outside, i.e., the United States, the EU or the U.N. When will Iranian "academics" such as yourself realize that this is our (meaning Iranian) problem and we neither lack the will or creativity to come up with solutions. What has the west ever done for Iran other than overthrow our governments, steal our wealth, support dicatators or try to create more hardships with sanctions.

Somehow, it seems ridiculous to this observer that the way to help Iranians is to make their lives worse by imposing economic sanctions on people. The ruling elite have the wealth, connections and resources to remain unfazed, it is the regular Iranian working his 9 to 5 that will feel the true impact of the sanctions. Please explain how this is a "solution" to the very serious problems that Iranians are facing.

It seems as though people forget the past too quickly. Here is an idea: let us stop looking for others to fix our problems, let us stop looking for sanctions that would only increase the suffering of theIranian people. (If I recall correctly, the sanctions regime imposed on Iraq did not make Saddam Hussien or his cohorts go hungry or cold for one night, but millions of Iraq's did.) and instead look on how we Iranians in diaspora can come together and work with our Iranian brothers and sisters to help our beloved country. Instead of sanctions, how about a non-political NGO that would be able to go to Iran, help set up free clinics, training centers and other necessities that people can use. Cannot go to Iran? well how about a group that raises the Iran issue here in the west, to educate folks so that we do not end up being another Iraq. Unless you think Iraq is a success of course.

thank you,

Neema Tavakoli

Brook
Wednesday, February 6, 2008 17:52 [ 2 ]

The lessons of history tell us that fascist regimes only lose power, when they hestiate in their willingness to be brutal. The Shah was a classic example. His failure to crackdown on dissidents led to his downfall.

This Iranian government learned lessons from that episode and they've spent 30 years making sure it won't be repeated. What do they care if reformists boycott an election or not? As long as they control the levers of power without interference, they could care less if the entire country is against them.

The only times Iran has backed down in the past is when they were faced with very tough resolute action from the US, which included military attacks on the Iranian navy. Reagan's weapons sales to "moderates" gained us nothing, and Clinton's apology to Iran was met with a firm rebuke from their supreme leader. This is a Cold War on a smaller scale. While invading Iran is not an option, doing everything fair and unfair to make sure Iranian's do not gain a foothold anywhere else should be a central tenent of our foreign policy.

Neema
Friday, February 8, 2008 22:50 [ 3 ]

Dear Brook:

Who should get a footing then, the Bush administration? Israel? The EU? - thats right lets support warmongers and colonialists. At least the Iranian regime only blocks reform for its own people. The so called western civilizations have consistently oppressed their own people as well as those abroad.

Please find some other place to spout your neo-imperialist, neo facist rhetoric. Thank you.

Neema T

Comments on this page are closed.



As of January 2009, this site is definitely closed, but you can follow Safa Haeri on his new blog: DAMAVAND at http://wwwdamavandsafa.blogspot.com


Condoleeza Rice
Mrs. Rice's counciliatory words about the Islamic Republic of Iran has helped the radicals instead of the moderates, according to many Iranian political analysts




Powered by the Big Medium content management system. sitemap xml