Iranian Presidential Selection ("Election") This Friday
By: Jabbar Fazeli, MD
Would Rafsanji Have Made A Difference?
Mr. Rafsanji was the only presidential candidate that could have transformed the ineffectual position of president into a more assertive role. He happens to be one of the richest men in Iran (1) and was Khamenei's king maker (2), not to mention the fact that he is an Ayatollah. There are thousands of political prisoners from all walks of life, but only one Ayatollah, Hossein Kazemeyni Boroujerdi.
Rafsanjani would have been in many ways untouchable and fully capable of staging an internal bloodless coup, hence his disqualification by the guardian council and the supreme leader's behind the scenes opposition to his candidacy.
Manufactured Election Drama
By eliminated the heavyweight candidate, the guardian council has left the Iranian people with a few light weight candidates squabbling to sit at the head of the table, the kiddie table.
The fact remains that the Shah and dictator of Iran is Ayatollah Khamaenei, who will, regardless of which candidate is elected president, have a free hand in dictating the course of actions in foreign policy and all important state matters.
Why is it then that some still get excited about the winner or loser in this predetermined presidential race in Iran?! I would submit that in a state of helplessness even a mirage can constitute a viable hope for the masses. That is why many may feel compelled to participate in this sham election.
"Reformist" Candidate
Yesterday, one of the two "reformist candidates", Mr. Aref withdraw from the race and endorsed the only remaining reformist candidate, Mr. Rouhani. This was done on the behest of the "reformist" and the charismatic ex-president Khatami.
 |
| Etemaad newspaper: "Reformists select Rohani", note the "green" ribbon changing color to avoid being shut down by the censors! |
Under the best case scenario for the reformists, the IRGC would allow Rohani to be elected president: then what?!
Four more years of Khatami style "reformist" government fighting against the majlis and the dictates of the supreme leader is the best that one can expect. The "would be" reformist president would be lucky to draft a simple budget without interference from everyone under the sun. The president would have no final say over anything, not even on budgetary issues, and would have to contend with secret expenditures, not to mention the IRGC smuggling and tax siphoning. He would likely be spared having to partake in the discussion about the billions of dollar (gazillion rials) spent on Hizbollah and the Syrian civil war; the IRGC and Khamenei can manage without the extra input. He will however have to come up with the best punch lines to explain why his government is not allocating dwindling financial resources for more pressing needs such as medicine or daily staples.
The new president, even if "reformist", would still have no final say on the nuclear issue, or negotiations with the United States, or restoration of diplomatic ties with the USA, Canada, and Britain, etc., or negotiating the lifting of sanctions.
The new president, if reformist, would nonetheless serve at least one purpose: that is to give the regime a lifeline for a few more months/years, as the election of a "reformist" would give the people the illusion of the "change" they seek even when in reality there is none.
What the reformists would consider a positive outcome would simply be an anesthetic that masks the symptoms for four more years, allowing the national cancer to grow unabated.
In their self-interest, the "reformists" and "revolutionaries" should hope for the most conservative candidate to be "selected" to this "garçon" position, aka, Iranian president. In such a scenario, the political fault-lines would be better delineated and the people of Iran would finally face the reality that they can't have "true change" without a "regime change" in Iran.
Reference:
Photo source: cartoon by Mana Neyestani
19 comments:
quite correct.
the election is a farce and the position has no real power other than which comes from pleasing the dictator and his small circle of dyspeptic old men.
perhaps the new president won't have his government aides arrested for sorcery or imprisoned for not being sufficiently respectful to the desires and dignity of the No.1 theocratic swine.
We used to have quite a few people here in the U.S. trash talk America in the '60s and early '70s, the way you do Iran, Jabbar, many from afar in Canada as you are here in the United States.
Loyal Americans, known at the time as the "silent majority," would just shake their head at such gutter talk.
Looks like that move, to exclude Rafsanjani and Mashaei, has demolished enemies' strategy to have hopes for claims of frauds and riots after the election.
So they have to count on kinds of hipocrysy, where they say that Rafsanjani could be a "savior" of the nation and he was removed by the "gang" of "illegitimate mullahs".
One author even "cried to the Rafsanjani's help" and stressed that Rafsanjani had said that "...we are not at war with(israel)" and I asked him (author), if we are not at war..then who kills our scientists, makes sabotages and plants computer viruses?
That author had apparently no time to answer that my question , but he apparently had a will to delete my several attempts to make comments.
If Mashaei would run then enemies would claim that there was violation of campaining procedures, because Ahmadinejad assissted Mashaei during the registration event..., and enemies through their proxies would call for riots and protests..
I remember from the pasts that some authors willingly assisted voices that Rafsanjani ammassed his wealth thru corruption and so on...and today they drop "false tears" in his defence.
A-F
Actually there is a very small minority of sour grapes self-hating "Iranians" who have been peddling these sorts of delusions for over 34 long years and will continue to do so until they perish. The FACT is that Iranian hybrid democracy has widespread support and Iranians accept the evolution of its post-revolutionary Islamic democracy.
Oh Mark is pissed off :) Can't you tolerate a critical article against your buddies?
I have not seen Jabbar Fazeli calling any of your propaganda articles / picyures gutter talk !
Mark why don't you move to iran for a year and post from there so your praise for the country will have credibly?
you afraid that you can't post from iran?
How can Iranians be "loyal" to a system that oppresses them and is the most disloyal anti- Iranian entity in Iran's history?
Loyalty should be towards one's country and family and friends.But when a regime attacks those very people "the silent majority" that we hold dear to our hearts then it's time for regime change.
Its like the BBC survey that implied Iran to be most hated country and Germany the most loved. Its making opinions and not investigating.(These days we all know how to ask in order to get the answers needed) The more you repeat it the more you believe it yourselves.
Solution is not to read and react to the nonsense reflected as pure anti propaganda, I presume as a liberal minded you should tolerate the intolerance and insults, at the same time consider the bitterness by some a personal issue rather than a political.
Wouldn't it be great to have been able to fast-forward "life" and have "some" observe what the results of their bitterness and anti Iranianism have brought them ?? I strongly think then, they would come back and start getting a life !
Azari by fortune and Iranian by grace of God.
Dariush London
Don't delude yourself little basij boy.The "FACT" is that no Iranain with an ounce of grey matter in their heads would believe the likes of you or that reactionary theocracy ("the small minority") that showed it's true colours in 2009 "selections". When it comes to "perish" the only ones heading that direction will be the occupying zealots in Tehran followed by their retarded and deluded minions.
Mr.Pyruz, I agree with Anonymous 5:29. It appears you are such the supporter of the current regime. If so, why in the world are you not living in Iran? Perhaps you should move to Iran and enjoy the rules and regulations that are imposed on the citizens that have NO say in anything. Perhaps you would enjoy paying triple the cost of goods. Perhaps you can move to Iran and post how wonderful Iran is and convince us to move there. Oh wait, you can't post from Iran. Maybe you can write us letter?
Z
Most elections are choosing between worse and worst... Typical in western nations.. It is unfortunate but a fact of life as candidates are just representatives of centers of powers and not true representation of people of the nation.
I know that there are well meaning people who wish for a bloody revolution to put a stop to what they perceive to be a brutal theocratic dictatorship. I think it is naive and juvenile to think that a bloody and messy revolution would bring about freedom of the type enjoyed by people in the west. It took the European society hundreds of years to reach their current level of openness and transparency – it wasn't an event but a rather slow and often interrupted process. Rohani is the right man to take the nation through that long journey towards an open and transparent society. As an Akhond, he is in a better position to bring sense to the Mullas inane pursuit of political power. I never voted in an Iranian election before but I am quite comfortable to vote for Rohani.
Study history of USA and Europe and you will find out that is want happened.
Reader,
Excellent analysis. Agree with you 100% Quite contrary to some regim supporters on this website that accuse every critic of the current Theocratic regim in Iran to be asking the US to attack Iran, I think the majority of the Iranians both in the country and abroad are looking for reforms of the Iranian regim, not a bloody revolution or even worse still a civil war, like the one in Syria. Any Iranian residing abroad should think about the dire consequences for the country and their loved ones back home in the event of a military attack / civil war. It is interesting that Khameneie appealed to the Iranians to "vote" for the sake of the country in a speach yesterday (for the first time) even if they are aganist the regim.
History has shown that totalitarian regims will fall. It might take time but it will happen.
You have malcontents in every society,I`m sure if the shah was still around they`d be ranting and screaming about how oppressed they felt and how anything would be better than him.Last time I looked it wasnt like you had much choice in the american political system,the choice was between "pepsi" and
"coke" but both of them were still "cola" ie two faces but the same coin
Anonymous June 12, 2013 at 1:05 AM
So its no different to the elections held in the west then
Anon 7:25...Less of the hookah now.
7:20 your argument doesn't make any sense.How can you compare a democratic country like America with a capital "A" to a militant shia religious dictatorship with all its unfounded zealotries? I hope you realize that the president of the IRI has as much power as the supreme leaders tea boy?
5:25 there wont be any attacks by the US or even aliens from Mars.The US after all helped install this god forsaken regime.The best way is not to "vote" and stay at home because by going to "vote" the regime will use that as propaganda and claim they have legitimacy.
Post a Comment