|
Back
to Articles
Three
Choices of Islamic leaders
By Masoud Behnoud
A great event occurred in Iran on February 28.th People turned
their backs to all political groups, including the reformists and
in big cities, 88% didn't vote and this was a very sad news for
Islamic Regime of Iran which always had a great crowd of people
participating in elections and demonstrations and showed it to the
world as a sign of its popularity.
After the results of the election which was the most insipid election
of the past twenty four years of the life of Islamic Republic, the
leaders of the regime faced three opposite analysis of this event
that will determine the future fate of the regime depending on the
one finally adopted.
The reformists, conservatives and traditionalists with each group
having their own concerns for the future of Islamic Republic, have
their own analysis of this event and each is trying to transfer
their analysis to the decision-makers on top in the quickest possible
way.
The reformists who confessed their defeat after five years of continuous
struggle with their two opponents in wining the votes, with a hope
still alive in their minds try to show that peoples' indifference
should make the leaders to pay more attention to people and give
up their insistence on Islamization of the regime.
According to the reformists, in order to find a way out of the present
crisis, the religious regime of Iran has no other alternative than
yielding to the demands of people that include western types of
freedoms, that is the very thing that traditionalist clergy fear
most and have called it Western Cultural Invasion.
The conservatives look at the results of the recent election with
one eye laughing and the other crying. The defeat of their reformist
rival was the very event they were waiting for and were actively
preparing its grounds in the past five years, but not at such a
price. While realizing the danger of the present situation, they
believe that the reformists' rush in implementing reformation and
their inefficiency in responding to peoples' demands is the main
cause of this tragic event.
A part of the conservatives see themselves ready to accept reformation
and change that part of their behavior that has made people particularly
the young generation to turn their back to the regime and they thus
invite leaders to choose middle ways and cooperation with reformists.
They believe that with such a policy they can save the regime from
the present crisis of legitimacy.Before the announcement of the
result of the election of Islamic councils, Kargozaran Sazandegi,
(operators of progressive construction) the party led by Hashemi
Rafsanjani, the moderate clergy, thought that they will finally
seize power and public popularity because they fundamentally aim
to improve the standards of life and economic prosperity. But the
election showed that they too are no longer in the public field
of vision.
From the view of the fundamentalists whose difference with the conservatives
comes to light mainly under critical circumstances, the result of
the election is not a catastrophe as the President Khatami has said,
but a great victory that prepares the scene for the emergence of
a regime based on holy guidance of the high ecclesiastics. They
believe that such a government like that of Taliban in Afghanistan
can shape Islamic society of Iran much more efficiently.
Objecting both political fronts, the traditionalists believe that
only by the formation of a powerful government based on Shiite principles
can lead to the survival of Islamic Republic. In contrast to the
conservatives, they believe in market economy and thus welcome the
extension of economic relations with the world. Traditionalists
see the world as a cultural battlefield and hold anti-exoticism
as one of their favorite values.
This group of clerics and their peers in theological schools, the
juridical power, Guardian Council and the Assembly of Khobregan
(elites) see themselves as the crème of the society and see
people's votes only secondary and as a kind of amusement and ornament
of a religious regime and believe in a two-staged election with
candidates being first selected by the clerics and in a fair distribution
of wealth and prevention of the outspread of the world culture –
including democracy.
That the people turned their backs to the election in which all
the legitimate political groups were actively participating showed
that after five years of Khatami's Presidency, people are tired
of the existing antagonisms between Fundamentalists and Traditionalists
with the Reformists and there is no longer the possibility of adopting
a middle eclectic way and the Islamic Republic should choose between
the continuation of the same policy or putting an end to the reformist
movement. And this is while the easy, but futureless policy of Traditionalists
has still some advocates and supporters.
What makes it difficult for the decision-makers of Islamic Republic
to find a new way is that the reformist solution – tested
already by election of Khatami – inevitably need to limit
the traditionalists' power and praxis that is the main power source
of Islamic Republic.
The middle way necessitates the exclusion of the reformists' active
figures, but this is not a remedy in the present affairs of the
world. The experience of the past five years shows that the continuation
of the inner struggle between reformists and the other two groups
will only lead to further weakening of the government and it is
not accompanied by people's support.
The alternative that the traditionalists suggest necessitates the
exclusion of all the reformists and also public opinion while at
the same time yielding to the accompanying isolation on the international
plane.
The existing situation in the world is far more difficult than it
was during the early years of the establishment of Islamic Republic.
Even then Ayatollah Khomeini discouraged the traditionalists by
his emphasis on election and establishment of some institutes such
as the Assembly of Discernment of the interests of the regime.
The alternatives that the leaders of Iran after February 28th are
facing, require painful operations that the decision makers of Islamic
Republic have been avoiding in the past and have always managed
to escape the impasse by finding middle ways, but Ayatollah Khomeini,
the charismatic leader of the revolution who had a great mastery
in difficult and even violent operations is no longer among them.
Five years after the last innovative middle way of accepting Khatami's
candidacy in the presidency election in 1988, accumulation of general
demands and unresolved economic and social crises show that avoiding
painful operations that governments sometimes carry out in order
to stay in power is not any cure, but will only prolong the pain
and make it chronic.
Under the world's present difficult situation and Iran's neighborhood
with Afghanistan and Iraq and middle Asian countries, in fact all
the regimes of the Middle East are facing a great challenge. The
reformists believe that there is no way to avoid a tragic end except
by gaining the support of the people.
In the message that President Khatami delivered the day after the
election of Islamic Councils, he acknowledged their defeat and has
said that Islamic Republic is facing a great danger, but there is
still a chance. However, there are many people who believe that
extremists have no longer left any chance for the survival of Islamic
Republic.
|
|