Fighting among themselves
Oct 13th 2005 TEHRAN
From The Economist print edition
Adversarial abroad, Iran's new president is being buffeted at home
“A KNIFE without a blade” is how Mehdi Bazargan, who headed Iran's first revolutionary government, described himself in 1979, and his words may strike a disagreeable chord with the new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Since he took office in August, parliament, influential unelected bodies and even members of his own cabinet have set out to blunt his egalitarian instincts and revolutionary zeal. At least Bazargan, a liberal, had the comfort of knowing that he was hemmed in by ideological opponents; when Mr Ahmadinejad speaks of “people who put spokes in the wheels”, he is referring to his friends.
Though they are, in the main, animated by the same conservative ideals as the president, many members of parliament backed rival candidates in the presidential election in June; they have been brazenly obstructive ever since. They started by withholding votes of confidence from four cabinet nominees whom they knew to be close to Mr Ahmadinejad. They decry his “security-based” approach to home affairs. And, on October 4th, they slowed the passage of two bills the government wanted to rush through parliament; one of them, which aims to dole out public-sector profits to struggling young couples, is the mainstay of the president's social policy.
Perhaps most ominous of all is the helping hand that Iran's “supreme leader”, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who is widely believed to have endorsed Mr Ahmadinejad's elevation, seems to be lending his tormentors. Last month, Mr Khamenei arranged for Muhammad Baqer Ghalibaf, a fellow conservative whom Mr Ahmadinejad defeated to become president, to become mayor of Tehran, the capital. (Defying convention, the president has not invited Mr Ghalibaf to cabinet meetings.) Then, earlier this month, Mr Khamenei gave the Expediency Council, an appointed body headed by a second defeated presidential candidate, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, “supervisory” powers over all branches of government. One council member pointedly observed that “everyone is obliged to abide by [the council's] conclusions.”
No one is sure how often the Expediency Council will intervene in everyday politics or what the constitutional implications will be. What is clear is that, in many conservatives' eyes, the president is too inexperienced and too exuberantly ideological to be trusted with all the powers that are theoretically his. Some have also been particularly unnerved by his attempts to crack down on corrupt officials. For his part, Mr Khamenei may be transferring power and influence, often from elected institutions, to bodies he appoints. The result may be confusion, but of a stable kind.
For stability is needed after the shock of last month's meeting of the governing board at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN's nuclear guardian, which was dominated by discussion of Iran's contentious nuclear programme. Board members confounded Iranian expectations by declaring Iran to be non-compliant with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and by raising the likelihood of referral to the UN Security Council. In Iran, Mr Ahmadinejad was blamed for alienating supporters on the board with a tough speech that he had delivered before the UN's General Assembly. In Mr Rafsanjani's caustic words, the need is for “diplomacy, not slogans”.
Step forward Mr Rafsanjani. As a former president who favours negotiations over confrontation, he seems the ideal man to lower tensions and prepare Iranians for the concessions that may be necessary if UN referral is to be avoided. While Mr Ahmadinejad was hectoring in New York, Mr Rafsanjani was quietly assuaging fears in Saudi Arabia that Iran is trying to turn Iraq into an aggressively Shia state. His trip was apparently successful—and the Saudis obligingly snubbed Mr Ahmadinejad's foreign minister by suddenly postponing the visit that he had been scheduled to make.
In the run-up to the next IAEA board meeting, in November, Mr Rafsanjani will urge Mr Khamenei to rein in his hardline nuclear negotiator and to resume stalled negotiations with Iran's European interlocutors, who insist that Iran must re-suspend its nuclear work at Isfahan before the talks can start again.
At the same time, the Iranians are serving notice of the chaos that they can sow, should they choose, in Iraq. Britain detects Iranian expertise in armour-piercing explosives that have cost, so far, eight British lives, and suspects Iran of training militants that are now active there.

2 Comments:
Fighting among themselves.
I think this article is way of the mark.
Agian islamic way of life and ultimatley politics is misunderstood by the western powers.
Iran is an Islamic democracy, differnt in nature to a westren style democracy, but none the less, it is a demacracy. Hence there are checks and balances in the political system, and this should continue to ensure the security of Iran. Western political commentators make errors in interpretation of these checks and balances, with a view to paint a picture of instability which does not exist.
The Iranian political system is set and here to stay, much to the sigh of the west and America and Britain in particular.
I do hope in all sincerity, that western commentators could take the time to understand Islam fisrt, then can they begin to understan islamic political culture.
In my estimation this situation with Iran has very little to do with nukes.
It does however has loads to do with the new Iranian Oil Bourse. Which will trade solely in Euros; not dollars. That is set to open on the 18th of March this year.
To me, the new president of Iran is a loud mouth, but I don't think that euro is going to stop trading with them because of stupid remarks.
It is in the rest of the worlds best interest to see the US fall, & not the other way around.
I looked at a few different COA's the US could use.
1. The US does nothing. Result, Iran trades Oil in Euros, the rest of the world oil market switches to the euro , the US dollar looses its reserve currency status.
2. The US attacks Iran. Aside from "freeing all those Iranians" with Nuclear waste (Yes they are going to either use DU munitions OR the US will use its new toys. Mini nukes.
I am old enough to remember the fall of the Shah of Iran. (a US sponsored Dictator, whos Secret police were the worse in the world for that time.
3. China & Russia back Iran. Veto in the security council. (thats the reason the US can't wait that long)
Israel runs with its master, who I migh add has already received in 2005: 100 F-16 fighters; 500 of the shallow depth bunker busters; & 300 of the deep ones.
Maybe Turkey will help too, ( they are pushing for points with the west)
This pack of crap that the US has laid out on everyone has the potential to set the world on fire.
My blog is
http://resistglobaltyranny.blogspot.com/
globalguerrilla
PS: there are other sites to get news from that counter a solely neoCon viewpoint.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home