:: Govind Talwalkar

Iran rotates on the axis of Ayatollahs and military

Govind Talwalkar

July.14 : The Guardian Council of Iran — a ruling body of senior Islamic clerics — has dismissed all allegations of vote-rigging and put a seal of approval on the victory of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The council now feels that the discrepancy in the counting is negligible and so there would not be a recount even in few constituencies.

It was held by some that Mr Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei were at loggerheads and the President was joining hands with the Revolutionary Guards to outflank the supreme leader. But instead of any fight they both are now hand in glove with the solid support of the Army.

That the massive demonstrations on the streets of Tehran and some other cities of Iran tapered off in a week’s time is no surprise. But they continued for a week is most surprising. It proved that at least in the urban areas the government has lost support. The demonstrations have deprived the government of its legitimacy. It is not that Mr Ahmadinejad had no support. He has it in mainly rural areas and the Opposition has practically no base not only in the rural areas but also among the working class.

When the people in the Iranian cities rose against the regime some critics in the United States compared it with the Solidarity movement in Poland and others with the demonstrations in Tiananmen Square. But the Solidarity movement started with the spontaneous strike of the dock workers. It took a long time for it to be effective. It also had the support of the Church which was a powerful force even under the Communist regime.

Some others thought of the fall of the Berlin Wall. But the wall also took some decades to fall. Moreover, the Communist Party and the government in East Germany were disintegrating and the wall came crashing down because of the uprising of the people not only from East Germany but from almost all of east Europe.

Any revolution is inspired by a revolutionary philosophy. There was no such revolutionary philosophy inspiring the recent uprising in Iran. At least leaders like Mir Hossein Mousavi are not revolutionaries and hold no different position with regard to religion or foreign policy. The demonstrators honestly felt an urgent need for a regime change as Iran’s inflation rate is over 26 per cent inflation and an equal percentage of unemployment. It has oil but its refining capacity is limited and it cannot increase due to lack of capital.

Mr Mousavi is the product of the Khomeini revolution of about 30 years ago. He never came out for the abolition of a theocratic rule and never advocated genuine democracy. That was why he did not oppose Ayatollah Khamenei. In Iran, the election has no meaning as the real power is held by the supreme leader who is never elected and is not responsible to the people or their representatives. The elected President has some powers but the foreign relations, security, nuclear power policy, internal law and order are all managed by the supreme leader.

As he is also the highest religious leader the government cannot function without his consent. It is said that Mr Ahmadinejad had cultivated the paramilitary forces and they, along with the Army, dealt with the demonstrators with a heavy hand. But the President did not dare to go against the supreme leader and wrest power. In fact, both cooperated with each other and Mr Ahmadinejad was dependent on the supreme leader who, if he so desired, could have rejected him. But having the same vested interests they collaborated.

Most of the American electronic media lost balance in this period. Some commentators talked of the French Revolution and the conservatives among them were highly critical of President Barack Obama’s handling of the situation. But, speaking objectively, Mr Obama had no other option than to express sympathy for the demonstrators and ask the Iranian authorities to listen to the voice of the people. He had to show that his administration was not involved in the happenings in Iran as the Iranians have not forgotten how British and American intelligence brought down Iran’s elected government 50 years ago.

Those conservatives who clamoured for some firm action against Iran forget that the unnecessary invasion of Iraq by the US has strengthened Iran which has become very powerful in the region. The US has no diplomatic relations with Iran and no worthwhile leader in Iran to support. Neighbouring Arab countries might have been wary about Iran’s nuclear ambition but could not welcome the overthrow of the regime by the power of the people as they fear that the contagion might spread to their states. It was, therefore, unadvisable and also self-defeating to instigate the demonstrators in the streets of Iranian cities when the US could not help them in any way. Some commentators constantly play the clip showing the then US President Ronald Regan speaking to a huge crowd before the Berlin Wall and asking Mikhail Gorbachev to break the wall. But it did not come down because Reagan asked for it. It was in the making for some decades and most important of all the Soviet system collapsed.

In this connection, Dr Henry Kissinger’s observations are pertinent. In his scholarly book — Diplomacy — he takes exceptions to the propaganda unleashed by Radio Free Europe at the time of the revolt both in Poland and Hungary and the actual action or the absence of it by the US. The pronouncement by the then secretary of state, John Foster Dulles that any east European country which broke away from Moscow could expect help from Washington was just nonsense as the US did nothing except approach the United Nations. It was right that Mr Obama did not follow that deceptive line.

It is true that the Iranian demonstrators would be disheartened and demoralised. In the coming months the authoritarian Iranian rulers might resort to more repressive measures. But that would not make them strong and stable. The economic deterioration is bound to bring in disillusionment and frustration. There is a limit to the China and Russia rescue operation. The rot might start then.

Even now there is a silver lining in the darkening clouds. Some religious scholars and researchers have issued a statement challenging the validity of the election results, thus defying the authority of the supreme leader which was never done before. Though Mr Mousavi has given up public meetings and demonstrations he has his website and has accused that 20 million more ballot papers were issued.

Some new leaders might come up putting aside those who were the beneficiaries of the regime of the axis of the Ayatollahs and the military. This axis has to be broken or disintegrated under its own weight, folly as well as crimes.