Re: Hardline Mayor Wins Iran Presidential Race
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:Unless the election was fixed via corruption and fraud, the people have once again proved the US wrong.
I would say you are grossly wrong there.
(Gawd, can any of you Americans ever leave your pro- or anti-Bush agenda at home when observing something some place else in the world? Pulease?! <cuts short by now traditional nimh rant>)
Anywho, this was what I posted in the "Democratisation in the Middle East" thread about the elections - I hadnt found any thread on the elections yet, despite the rather eye-catching first round a week ago. Might as well copy it here now that there is one. It was two posts actually, but I'll merge 'em.
----------------------------------------------------------
Well, it's certainly a surprise
.
It was already a big surprise when he reached the run-off; everyone was betting on an ample Rafsanjani lead with perhaps reformist Moin (or Moeen) coming in second - but Moin ended fifth, instead. Despite a high turnout, which had been predicted to benefit reformists.
I havent read about the run-off yet, but regarding the first round there were complaints of fraud. It was considered very suspicious that the Guardian Council had published an opinion poll that, unlike any other, already had Ahmadinezhad in second place, and even more suspicious that the Council published partial results the day after the elections showing him in second place when the Ministry of the Interior's numbers still had him third.
But the result could also have reflected the alienation of voters who want real change, with dissidents like Noble Prize winner Shirin Ebadi calling for a boycott.
For one, because the spectacle of free elections served to cloak the fact that the President thus elected will be nothing but a figurehead. When Khatami was first elected as reformist President in 1997 with such a surprising massive majority, mostly thanks to the young and women, he won a position that still had considerable clout. However, already then the office was secondary to the authority of the Guardian Council and Supreme Leader Khamenei. And as Khatami's government and the Guardian Council kept clashing and undoing each other's decisions and actions, the Council used its overriding power to whittle away ever more of the President's authorities, making Khatami ever more impotent - and the population, in turn, disillusioned in Khatami; two strikes in one.
By now, the office is thus a rather empty one, so the elections were something of a show - despite the wholly sincere enthusiasm and involvement of these or those voters.
A second reason for the boycott call was that, even if the counting of votes had been completely honest, the race was already rigged. After all, the Council of Guardians had controlled the nomination process. And out of over 1,000 initial registrations, it had only approved seven candidates. And a number of better-known reformists were barred, (deliberately?) leaving Moin, a rather uncharismatic figure, as the standard-bearer for true reformism.
Possibly the most progressive voters followed the boycott call (especially in the second round, which must have been depressingly uninspiring for them), yielding the victory to the conservative mayor of Teheran? Ahmadinezhad has a strong following in Teheran's poorest neighbourhoods, it seems, because of practical things he achieved for the city.
Anyhow, clever strategisms of the conservative Guardians there. In the short-term. In the long-term, it makes it more likely that the longing for change will take on more violent forms.
----------------------------------------
Turnout in the second round was only 47%, compared with 63% in the first round, which would confirm the above (Ahmadinezhad winning because reformist voters stayed home).
Still, on the bright side - this was the take of the Dutch news about the first round (I came here looking for a thread to post this in, in fact, and am kinda flabbergasted that there hasn't apparenly been any thread on the Iranian elections at all, only that stupid one about "War With Iran Has Begun"). And though the eventual results cast a pall on the analysis, I think it still makes an interesting and important point:
Quote:Youngsters decide in Iran
NOTE ->16 June 2005
(translated from NOS Nieuws)
The era of the popular reformist Khatami is over. In Iran a President may only serve two terms and so there will be an other now. Khatami won twice with a landslide, but the last few years he's come under very much criticism.
He was said not to act strongly enough against the conservatives and he would avoid confrontation too much. Probably that's all true and it is also true that many of the changes that the reformers had wanted to implement have been blocked by conservative, often unelected bodies.
Nevertheless his influence has been enormous. Iran is a very different country than it was in 1997. He has started a process of liberalisation that can't be stopped.
He started making stronger ties with other countries. That too is an irreversible process. More should have been done, but if you look at the themes of the election campaign his influence is very clear.
Completely taboo
Four conservative candidates with a background in the ultra conservative Revolutionary Guard are competing with three reformers and a centrist cleric. All candidates have adopted themes that previously had been exclusively entertained by reformers.
Some of them, such as the expansion of personal freedoms and the opening of ties with the West, even with America, were until recently completely taboo.
Now even conservative candidate Larijani calls for religious modernity, when as head of state television he has mostly broadcast programmes about strict religious morality.
And Rafsanjani, who was an important advisor of the founder of the Islamic Republic Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini, wants to give women more rights. All themes of the reformers.
Reformers
And what about the reformers? The most important candidate, Moin, has pulled the programme of the reformers even further on. He has even opened ties with forbidden organisations in Iran and he has dared to demand that the President should get more actual authorities.
At the moment, spiritual leader Khamanei always has the last word. If it's up to Moin, the President will really obtain the executive power. This is a very fraught issue in Iran, considering that the untouchability of the spiritual leader if part of the fundament of the state order.
Turnout
[..] Turnout will be important. On a low turnout conservatives in Iran tend to get more votes. But a low turnout would be bad for the legitimacy of the regime as a whole. Turnout in the countryside is expected to be higher than in the city.
[Among reformers and conservatives,] Rafsanjani is a little bit in between. He is mostly known for his practical behaviour. He sees his country as a huge bazar where everything can be negotiated.
The Iranian youth will play an important role. More than half of Iranians is younger than 25. In Iran you're allowed to vote when you're 15. That's why many candidates target youngsters in their campaigns. [..] They smile on poters and on TV they debate students, even if it's an orchestrated debate.
Corruption and murder
But many Iranians don't want any of the candidates and don't see the use of voting. They say they're all people who are part of the system.
Some are suspected of corruption and even involvement in murder, like Rafsanjani, although that was never proven. They won't vote, because they want to get rid of the system, period. [..]
Heated discussions
Everyone you speak freely speaks their mind. On the street you hear heated discussions about politics. Youths have waged campaign evening after evening, with music, mixed dancing [!], and hooting. All that would have been unheard of in the Iran of a few years ago.
With that, Khatami, who conquered the country with his smile, his humanity and his approachability, has put an unerasable stamp on the country, even if he is not getting the credits from everyone for that now.
As said, with the final result in mind this take may now seem overly optimistic. But I think the point about Khatami's role, especially where it concens
social and cultural, rather than political change, is only fair.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace