Tuesday
Aug182009
Iran Debate: Is Hashemi Rafsanjani A Spent Force?
Tuesday, August 18, 2009 at 9:12
Iran: Is Rafsanjani (or Ahmadinejad) A Spent Force? The Sequel
The Latest from Iran (18 August): Which Way for the Government?
Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis
Throughout yesterday, there was a fascinating (and, I think, important) debate between two of Enduring America's specialists on Iran, Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones, about the political fortunes of Hashemi Rafsanjani. The discussion not only considers whether the former President retains a significant influence over the future of the Islamic Republic but also looks at the positions of the Supreme Leader and President Ahmadinejad. Feedback from readers would be welcome, as I believe this may be one of the defining contexts for the outcome of this post-election crisis:
SMITH: I think that Rafsanjani has been giving up his "Godfather" role within the Green movement progressively. If you add up his non-reply to [Mehdi] Karroubi's letter [on abuse of detainees], his embarassing retreat from Friday prayers, and today [appearing with President Ahmadinejad], you get the impression of someone who is deeply distressed but does not feel secure enough to embark on a major confrontation with the state power. It is unnerving in the sense that, as the Mehr photos show [of the Rafsanjani-Ahmadinejad encounter], it is actually Rafsanjani that is adopting a body language geared towards subordination, and not the other way round. The gesture is the single most important "frame" to have come out of elite circles in Iran afte the shoulder kiss of Ahmadinejad to the Supreme Leader during his inauguration.
JONES: But then again, what did Rafsanjani have to gain from replying to Karroubi's letter? That's a hot potato that even [Mir Hossein] Mousavi is wary of handling. I do agree that Rafsanjani is deeply distressed (something his brother made clear), but I'm not sure his "Godfather" role was anything but a superficial and transitory collision of interests. Now Rafsanjani is unsure how his interests are best served and is thus "pausing". This also coincided with the emergence of the Majlis [Parliament]hmin challenging Ahmadinejad, a dynamic in which Rafsanjani was less involved.
I think when he does get around to speaking at Friday Prayers, we will have a much better understanding of his peace of mind and tactical re-appraisal.
SMITH: Rafsanjani's speech on July 17 was quite genuine, as was the distress he vented out through his brother on the Iranian Labor News Agency. But he has realised that Khamenei has gone for brute force and that it's better for himself and his family to back down. So my gut feeling is that there is more than transitory interests here, but he is by now emerging as a spent force. The one and last stand he could/might make is the next Assembly of Experts meeting, whenever that will take place; however, despite all this prodding from former MPs, Grand Ayatollahs, etc. that we have been seeing in the form of all these anonymous letters calling for Khamenei's head, I doubt we shall see Rafsanjani substantiating these.
A passing joke among myself and my Iranian contacts is that the Assembly of Experts communique dismissing Khamenei would not even reach the website of the Assembly before all those septuagenarians are carted away.
JONES: I agree that this pressure will have a lasting legacy. In effect, I think the parameters of Iranian political culture, memory and participation have been extended. In the short term, the regime equates compromise with weakness. In the longer term, such will be the fear of bringing millions of Iranians onto the streets that compromise will be equated with stability (perhaps even survival).
I can think of very few popular movements who have mobilised equivalent support and not gone on to extract or induce significant concessions or changes in the long term.
I guess the extent to which we see Rafsanjani as a spent force depends on our expectations of what he wanted to achieve and how realistic it was he could achieve it. The removal of Ahmadinejad? I don't think was achievable, and Rafsanjani eventually understood this. So, he settled for the effective neutering of Ahmadinejad's 2nd administration, which I think will happen. Khamenei was, in my view, equally never going to be removed. But Rafsanjani ultimately challenged him and is still standing- that's radical in itself. The question is, what has the last 2-3 months cost him? Has it cost Khamenei more or less?
SMITH: I would urge caution on Rafsanjani's capability of neutering Ahmadinejad's administration, but I agree that much has changed in the Iranian political landscape for good in the past two months, regardless of any future progress by the Green movement. However, I am sure that Khamenei has factored in some "cost" or "loss" when agreeing to go by with the hardliners, although I can't say whether he was really ready for this sort of reaction from the people.
As for Rafsanjani, well, he has paid a high price all along. He was lambasted by Ahmadinejad in the debates, has had people extremely close to him such as [Mohammad] Atrianfar, [Mohammad] Qoochani and others thrown into jail and paraded before TV long after his Friday prayer plea for their release, was forced to backtrack when he withdrew from the last Friday prayers [14 August], and today, according to one of the main columnists of Etemade Melli, he "bowed before Ahmadinejad like a servant does in front of his master". So, all in all, I have to stake my claim that he has not emerged in a very good posiition overall, although he has managed to cling on to some of his old powers and be somewhat "radical". But, as Iranian politics have thought us, its better to wait and see, starting from the Assembly of Experts meeting!
JONES: Do you think there was anything Rafsanjani could have done differently? This may be a curious case where none of the current "heavyweights" of the system have come off well, least of all Ahmadinejad (and Khamenei).
Raf's fortunes have ebbed and flowed: he was far more humilated by his loss to Ahmadinejad in 2005 than by the slurs in the 2009 debate. Fact remains, Rafsanjani is still more powerful than Ahmadinejad. The reason being that Ahmadinejad has never challenged the Supreme Leader and was effectively told to shut up and keep out of sight (something Khamenei could not do to Rafsanjani).
I don't think Rafsanjani expected those detained to be released; he wanted it on record that he had called for it. I also think that the mutterings about Rafsanjani are the continuation of old complaints, but the rumblings about Khamenei's suitability as Supreme Leader are something that have never ever come out before, even if they were felt privately by many). As you say, however, we will have to wait and see.
SMITH: I am still unsure of the real extent of Rafsanjani's power. On paper, he is as powerful as it gets, more so given that he survived an attempt to remove him from the leadership of the Assembly of Experts in February, meaning that he could technically count on a majority there.
As for his fortun, you should take the pre-electoral slurs and post-electoral moves as one big package. Not to forget the total sidelining of his concerns, as stated in the letter and three-hour meeting he had with Khamenei right before the elections. A close Rafsanjain associate boasted about the "positive signals" emerging from that meeting to several foreign diplomats, so you can appreciate the sort of "con" Khamenei played on his old associate.
The slurs against Rafsanjani were conducive, according to my own field work and those of others in Tehran before the elections, to a rise of votes for Ahmadinejad, while I will wait for the Assembly of Experts meeting to express my thoughts on his post electoral performance. However, in terms of real influence in state decision-making, I would say that Ahmadinejad is going quite strong. True, he is rebuked from all quarters, including the Supreme Leader, every now and then, but he has been remarkably successful in exerting his own viewpoints on the long-term evolution of many affairs of state, including the nuclear file, relations with the West, and the economy. He has driven the economy to shambles yet nobody has really managed to serious "punish" him for that, which is quite astonishing in its own right.
The Latest from Iran (18 August): Which Way for the Government?
Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis
Throughout yesterday, there was a fascinating (and, I think, important) debate between two of Enduring America's specialists on Iran, Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones, about the political fortunes of Hashemi Rafsanjani. The discussion not only considers whether the former President retains a significant influence over the future of the Islamic Republic but also looks at the positions of the Supreme Leader and President Ahmadinejad. Feedback from readers would be welcome, as I believe this may be one of the defining contexts for the outcome of this post-election crisis:SMITH: I think that Rafsanjani has been giving up his "Godfather" role within the Green movement progressively. If you add up his non-reply to [Mehdi] Karroubi's letter [on abuse of detainees], his embarassing retreat from Friday prayers, and today [appearing with President Ahmadinejad], you get the impression of someone who is deeply distressed but does not feel secure enough to embark on a major confrontation with the state power. It is unnerving in the sense that, as the Mehr photos show [of the Rafsanjani-Ahmadinejad encounter], it is actually Rafsanjani that is adopting a body language geared towards subordination, and not the other way round. The gesture is the single most important "frame" to have come out of elite circles in Iran afte the shoulder kiss of Ahmadinejad to the Supreme Leader during his inauguration.
JONES: But then again, what did Rafsanjani have to gain from replying to Karroubi's letter? That's a hot potato that even [Mir Hossein] Mousavi is wary of handling. I do agree that Rafsanjani is deeply distressed (something his brother made clear), but I'm not sure his "Godfather" role was anything but a superficial and transitory collision of interests. Now Rafsanjani is unsure how his interests are best served and is thus "pausing". This also coincided with the emergence of the Majlis [Parliament]hmin challenging Ahmadinejad, a dynamic in which Rafsanjani was less involved.
I think when he does get around to speaking at Friday Prayers, we will have a much better understanding of his peace of mind and tactical re-appraisal.
SMITH: Rafsanjani's speech on July 17 was quite genuine, as was the distress he vented out through his brother on the Iranian Labor News Agency. But he has realised that Khamenei has gone for brute force and that it's better for himself and his family to back down. So my gut feeling is that there is more than transitory interests here, but he is by now emerging as a spent force. The one and last stand he could/might make is the next Assembly of Experts meeting, whenever that will take place; however, despite all this prodding from former MPs, Grand Ayatollahs, etc. that we have been seeing in the form of all these anonymous letters calling for Khamenei's head, I doubt we shall see Rafsanjani substantiating these.
A passing joke among myself and my Iranian contacts is that the Assembly of Experts communique dismissing Khamenei would not even reach the website of the Assembly before all those septuagenarians are carted away.
JONES: I agree that this pressure will have a lasting legacy. In effect, I think the parameters of Iranian political culture, memory and participation have been extended. In the short term, the regime equates compromise with weakness. In the longer term, such will be the fear of bringing millions of Iranians onto the streets that compromise will be equated with stability (perhaps even survival).
I can think of very few popular movements who have mobilised equivalent support and not gone on to extract or induce significant concessions or changes in the long term.
I guess the extent to which we see Rafsanjani as a spent force depends on our expectations of what he wanted to achieve and how realistic it was he could achieve it. The removal of Ahmadinejad? I don't think was achievable, and Rafsanjani eventually understood this. So, he settled for the effective neutering of Ahmadinejad's 2nd administration, which I think will happen. Khamenei was, in my view, equally never going to be removed. But Rafsanjani ultimately challenged him and is still standing- that's radical in itself. The question is, what has the last 2-3 months cost him? Has it cost Khamenei more or less?
SMITH: I would urge caution on Rafsanjani's capability of neutering Ahmadinejad's administration, but I agree that much has changed in the Iranian political landscape for good in the past two months, regardless of any future progress by the Green movement. However, I am sure that Khamenei has factored in some "cost" or "loss" when agreeing to go by with the hardliners, although I can't say whether he was really ready for this sort of reaction from the people.
As for Rafsanjani, well, he has paid a high price all along. He was lambasted by Ahmadinejad in the debates, has had people extremely close to him such as [Mohammad] Atrianfar, [Mohammad] Qoochani and others thrown into jail and paraded before TV long after his Friday prayer plea for their release, was forced to backtrack when he withdrew from the last Friday prayers [14 August], and today, according to one of the main columnists of Etemade Melli, he "bowed before Ahmadinejad like a servant does in front of his master". So, all in all, I have to stake my claim that he has not emerged in a very good posiition overall, although he has managed to cling on to some of his old powers and be somewhat "radical". But, as Iranian politics have thought us, its better to wait and see, starting from the Assembly of Experts meeting!
JONES: Do you think there was anything Rafsanjani could have done differently? This may be a curious case where none of the current "heavyweights" of the system have come off well, least of all Ahmadinejad (and Khamenei).
Raf's fortunes have ebbed and flowed: he was far more humilated by his loss to Ahmadinejad in 2005 than by the slurs in the 2009 debate. Fact remains, Rafsanjani is still more powerful than Ahmadinejad. The reason being that Ahmadinejad has never challenged the Supreme Leader and was effectively told to shut up and keep out of sight (something Khamenei could not do to Rafsanjani).
I don't think Rafsanjani expected those detained to be released; he wanted it on record that he had called for it. I also think that the mutterings about Rafsanjani are the continuation of old complaints, but the rumblings about Khamenei's suitability as Supreme Leader are something that have never ever come out before, even if they were felt privately by many). As you say, however, we will have to wait and see.
SMITH: I am still unsure of the real extent of Rafsanjani's power. On paper, he is as powerful as it gets, more so given that he survived an attempt to remove him from the leadership of the Assembly of Experts in February, meaning that he could technically count on a majority there.
As for his fortun, you should take the pre-electoral slurs and post-electoral moves as one big package. Not to forget the total sidelining of his concerns, as stated in the letter and three-hour meeting he had with Khamenei right before the elections. A close Rafsanjain associate boasted about the "positive signals" emerging from that meeting to several foreign diplomats, so you can appreciate the sort of "con" Khamenei played on his old associate.
The slurs against Rafsanjani were conducive, according to my own field work and those of others in Tehran before the elections, to a rise of votes for Ahmadinejad, while I will wait for the Assembly of Experts meeting to express my thoughts on his post electoral performance. However, in terms of real influence in state decision-making, I would say that Ahmadinejad is going quite strong. True, he is rebuked from all quarters, including the Supreme Leader, every now and then, but he has been remarkably successful in exerting his own viewpoints on the long-term evolution of many affairs of state, including the nuclear file, relations with the West, and the economy. He has driven the economy to shambles yet nobody has really managed to serious "punish" him for that, which is quite astonishing in its own right.
Reader Comments (22)
I believe it was Napoleon who once said our victory is in the mistakes of our enemies. And no one seems to have understood this better then Hashemi Rafsanjani. He has like no other the descipline and self control to know when to sit back and wait. He seems to always know when to look the other way and when to launch an attack. If one takes a big step back and looks at the big picture what Hashemi has achieved thus far is nothing short then genius in its purest form.
Lets look at the naked facts. Hashemi has proved to have a great pull/ push within the old establishment resulting in him being the head of the two of the most powerfull councils in the country and has managed attacks to his position winning comfortably.
At the same time in almost half a decade we have seen this man failing to win a seat in the Majlis, then losing to A.N for the presidency (A nobody at a time). so in other words we have seen Hashemi losing the popular vote on every occassion. For now if desregarding the high fraud elections then Yes indeed this was a man very much hated by the public. Yet today he has managed to shift the hate from him self to the Supreme leader and the Revolutionary Guards and evenmore has a nation chant in the streets his name. He has become once again a popular force. His FP was perhaps the fullest of them all attracting more then the Leader or any other FP speaker.
Furthermore we have a nation that was tired of the Clergy and their days seemed to be coming to an end but due to the recent happenings the clergy once again are hero's that speak against the goverment. What we have is a new legitamcy of Clergy to rule and to lead. (Karoubi, Khatami, Hashemi, other ayatollahs speaking against the goverment and being followed and honoured by people for it)
One thing we should not forget is that no one and I emphesise no one in this power struggle is in this for the people, each is fighting for their own interests. The intresting thing about the struggle is that the power is so devided that no has the strenght to go at it alone so alliances are needed. It is here that lies the true power of Hashemi and why I feel that his days are far from over. He knows and realizes this hence playing his cards very carefully and waiting for the other players to make a move, anticipating them to make mistakes. At the same time being active indirectly. Hashemi has a great reach in Iran and his influence can be found in almost every corner of the Iranian Goverment. What he is doing is playing his cards indirectly but still keeping on the pressure. Example; people asking him to interfene as head of the assembly of experts from all sides. He can afford to not act and dissapoint people as he know that this is a nation with very few possibilities so they are very forgiving as they are desperate for a leader for change. History has allready proven this forgiving him very easily before (having hated him just a few years ago) and will forgive him again once he decides to make a move (if he ever makes a move it is when it is in his interest but people will still be thankfull and will forgive him for it as they are desperate for a leader in a society where leaders with power are hard to come by)
One thing seems to be certain, From the four factions fighting for power (Reformists (Green movement), Hashemi (Old clergy Establishment), Rev.Gurds (Fascist Anti Cleric force with A.N as their front man) and Khamenei) the Reformists seem to be holding the weakest cards. They are just a pawn being used in the battle against the power of Guards and do not have any major power then the popular vote which we have seen can be made quite by brute force.
The other thing that seems certain is that one of the other three forces will be eliminated. If Hashemi falls so will the reformists, if Khameni falls so will the Guards. Chances are (and that is what I am afraid of) that we will get a new Khamenei, Hashemi pact (leading to Khamenei distancing himself more and more from A.N and eventually resulting in the removal of A.N in the future. At the same time a re-organisation of the Basij, Ansar Hezbollah and Rev. Guards. to have more cleric friendly top) However this would still be a short lived pact as Hashemi is 75 years and Khamenei seems to be having more problems with his health bringing us back to same struggle for power as to whom is the heir to the leadership of Iran.
Haviong started with a saying the above brings me back to another popular saying that one can lead a country if loved, one can even lead a country if feard but in the long run one can never lead a country if truly hated. Even if Khamenei survives this fight for battle by either allying with Hashemi or the Guards he still may end up pulling on the losing side as he has lost the popular voite beyond the point of repair.
For me Hashemi is the only one of the four sides that seems to for now have the winning cards but who is he going to play the cards against ?
Continuing the Napoleonic motif, Napoleon was the master of the tactical withdrawal. When his enemies thought they had him where they wanted him, he had his forces waiting patiently just behind the mountain. All I know is what I've read since the election, but Rafsanjani seems to be in his element behind the scenes. Analysts seem surprised at how openly he has spoken & operated since the election. A week or 2 ago he abruptly pulled back from the public eye. Maybe he was routed, but was he really? I wouldn't read too much into yesterday's body language without considering the speech that followed. Ahmadinejad walked out. Was it a mark of disrespect or was he escaping the words he lacked the power to stop?
As for Ahmadinejad, he behaves like a man who _believes_ the strength of his backers is such that he needs give only a cursory nod to other branches of govt, with maybe 2 nods to the Supreme Leader.
addendum
Of course any Napoleonic analogy is incomplete without Waterloo...
[...] more: Iran Debate: Is Hashemi Rafsanjani A Spent Force? | Enduring America Tags: a-nation-chant, has-managed, streets, the-streets [...]
Rafsanjani is not a spent force, but also is not as powerful as he was before. Perhaps the most powerful player today is the Pasdaran. Quietly and behind the scene they have rejected solutions, put up nothing but the Basijji goons, and increased their military and economical clout in both the administration of the state, and its security. The leader is heavily reliant on them for his security and existence. Ahmadinejad is nothing but a humble servant of them, and the conservatives in Majles know they don't have the influence or clout to confront them. Rafsanjani too has no ability to influence them. Their power is such that no single player can confront them, and as such they all confront one another. Watch them slowly win......
WIMV,
Please explain the Pasdaran. I am really too uneducated to make the comments I post, but I can't seem to stop myself
To Amy,
Pasdaran is Revolutionary Guard (A Fascist Anti Cleric Military Power). As I mention in my post above they are one of the 4 major players together with the Reforminst (Green Movement), Hashemi (Old Cleric Establishment) and Khamenei(Principlists). The way things look now either Hashemi (and the cleric establishment with him) or Pasdaran (the Guards) will have to leave the scene.
The question is still open as to which one and incase the Guards fall will they take Khameni with them !!?
A Fifth silent power in this thus far is the armed forces (Army). Will they get involved at one point and if so in what way !!???
You are right Afsin, the fifth player, who has played no card at all (except the renegade 20 who were arrested) is the army. I feel that they will continue to be just that, a silent player, and will not step into the fold in any capacity. Unless clearly and directly asked for by the Leader to crush the Pasdaran, which will be like commitment of suicide by the leader. Hence we can put them aside as a non player for now.
If the principalists could have convince the Pasdaran to give up on AN, then we would have had the making of a solution, where Rafsanjani takes home the compromise of AN gone, and the two (Pasdaran and principalists) control the scene. A new president candidate more palatable to Rafsanjani and Pasdaran is put forth. Galibaf springs to mind. This scenario has already been rejected after the 5 day extension was granted to the guardian council. Pasdaran refused it outright and Khamanei and Pasdaran are gunning for the win, it seems. They feel they can see the finnish line, and that compromise and deviation right now is a form of weakness. They will continue to fight with no compromise offered to either Rafsanjani or the reform group.
Hashemi by shifting his lot, from the reform to the middle and supporting the Larijani's and the Principalists has left himself exposed and weakened the reform movement for now. If a compromise is not offered to him, watch him lead another Friday Prey and give wind to the wings of reform. However the danger in all of this is that if the reform, greens and people reject Hashemi's next attempt at swinging, he is truly left hanging to die. The old man is playing a dangerous game, but then that is why they call him the shark.
What now, if the principalists slowly but surely over the course of the next few months get upset with the AN and Pasdaran? Rafsanjani slowly sings in their ears and convinces them to dance with him? Would they swing to be behind the greens and Hashemi? I doubt it, but this united force, may be the only way to crush the AN pasdaran alliance. In this scenario Khamanei will naturally be reduced from the Leader to a member of a three man council of leaders. There will be Khatami in there to present the reformers and a principalist too thrown in for good measure. The Assembly of experts will then have direct oversight over this leadership three. This I think is the ideal scenario for Rafsanjani and what he is playing for. That's my 2 cents and its worth just that.....
Afshin
Your #1 comment above was astute and very helpful. I have a question about this part:
That part is generally true of US politicians too, but, of course, the struggle plays out differently. There's a complex interplay between personal ambition, ideology, moneyed interests, party affiliation, and, oh yeah, the people... Nobody is uncompromised, especially politicians, but occasionally someone genuinely has the interests of the people at heart. Such politicians don't often win, but they speak for people who have no voice... they won't shut up or go away, to the great dismay of politicians who want to guard the status quo. Mehdi Karroubi strikes me that way. Do you think it's the case?
whereismyvote
wow... you serve up a lot for 2 cents
Do you think your last scenario is the best the people can hope for? Clearly they are not a consideration to any of the players, but what is the best realistic outcome for the people of Iran at this point?
Afshin,
"One thing we should not forget is that no one and I emphesise no one in this power struggle is in this for the people, each is fighting for their own interests."
Your analysis is very pessimistic but, alas, it sounds very convincing.
whereismyvote,
"This I think is the ideal scenario for Rafsanjani and what he is playing for."
What are the advantages for the people of Iran with this scenerio (if any)?
"the fifth player, who has played no card at all (except the renegade 20 who were arrested) is the army"
One player we must not forget, even if it has almost be silenced, is the people; its reactions could be unpredictable if Raf betrays their expectatons (just my gut feeling ; like Amy, I'm politically uneducated - what political education I got over the last few weeks I owe mainly to EnduringAmerica!)
@ Amy,
No Karoubi has his hands dirty as well as all of them, same goes for Mousavi and the rest of them. They all have blood on their hands.
The only one that springs into mind of being somewhat Genuine is Grand Ayatollah Montazeri. He is the Grandest Iranian Ayataollah in Iran (Sistani is also Iranian but living in Irak) he dared talk of all this when Khomeini was still alive and when he actually was Heir to be the leader after Khomeini's death. He was what Khomeini had called Fruit of my Work. After his critism to what was going on he was put aside with Khomeini saying he was no longer worthy to follow him. He has also confessed of having blood on his hands and has shown remorse.
I can imagine that perhaps people like Mousavi and Karoubi as well as Khatami would like things to be diffrent and perhaps they are even changed men today having seen the light but still they have blood on their hands too from before.
One thing you need to take notice off is that what is happening in Iran today is a movement that started approximatly 10 years ago when the Guards started to more and more move away from their traditional role (military) and started to move into business and later politics. One result of this has been the removal of the Clergy from all important postitions. They started from the bottom and are working them selves up all the way to the supreme leader.
The Guards could have possibly gotten away with this was it not that some of them such as A.N are very idealistic and have been to a certain extent fighting Corruption. A.N policies have been a major threat to the old establishment; people like Hashemi needed to act.
@ whereismyvote
I do not see the removal of A.N being enough. Hashemi and the Clerics will not take anything less then re-organisation of the Guards, sharing of the power and diffrent more West friendly policies.
They want their piece of the Pie....
Thanks Florence And Amy
The best outcome for the Iranian people is for a genetically designed virus to kill all the Mullahs overnight... Kidding, but reform rule and the achievement of power by the reformers (in any capacity) and the weakening of the unelected offices is the best outcome. If the office of the Leader is weakened and the Pasdaran checked all the better for the people. As soon as their voice is heard and the unelected portions of the government checked or removed, a process has begun that will end well for the people.
Amy;
Yes Mousavi and Khatami have checkered pasts. They both were against the people when it suited them. Mousavi in the 8 years of war, where he sucked to Khomeini unconditionally at the expense of 2 million dead, and Khatami when in 1999 walked away from the people and left the students to die. However we are all pragmatists in Iran and we take what we can get. In the pile of s*** that we have for leaders these two are the best. Karoubi is a true populist politician and may be the saviour of the clerical politician. He is trying to make clerics popular with the people. He is for now the man of the people, but if that virus was invented, then we will be happy with Karoubi as its "collateral damage".
Maybe Rafsanjani wants you to think he is weak. The Judiciary chief Larijani said AD is making a big mistake in treating RJ as a has-been. RJ knows: deceiving is better than attacking an armed enemy. Remember: Brutus feigned idiocy while he secretly prepared to depose the last King of Rome. http://bit.ly/RNi8J
whereismyvote
So you would release the Cleric virus before engineering a Pasdaran variant?
Thanks Amy;
If I was a kid in a chocolate store, would I eat chocolate candy or would I drink chocolate fudge? That's your offer, and any kid would say both........ but then again to answer you directly.
Today, the Pasdaran still need the clerics to survive, as their legitimacy comes from the Leader and the clerical class that supports them unconditionally so they can run things silently from behind the scene. Assuming the virus kills all clerics, the Pasdaran will be severely weakened anyways, they will lose their shroud, so they can then be picked off by a common cold we hope. We still rather see the clergy go and wait for another virus to pick off the Pasdaran later.
whereismyvote & Afshin
Thanks for the education and the biology lesson. Here's hoping for chocolate ice cream and chocolate cake with fudge on top ;)
Not being one to comment often on articles, I enjoyed the dialogue in back and forth and decided to participate in this case. The discussion between "Mr. Smith" and "Mr. Jones" from EA was very interesting, however I (as a self educated student of Iranian history and politics) believe Afshin and whereismyvote have brought up some interesting points as well. I think it is important to consider Rafsanjani's past and a general perception that many still hold towards him, but throughout history Iranian have always looked for the "charismatic" leader reminicient of Persia's great rulers and my humble opinion (and it is nothing more than that) is this is why many still look to him. He does have that charisma that many "leaders" in Iran currently do not have....keeping in mind I use this in a relative sense. I also agree with the points Afshin and whereismyvote have brought up regarding Mousavi and Khatami as well. One thing I feel that does not receive the attention and dialogue it deserves is the fact all of these men are part of the establishment...all were a part of the movement that put the Islamic Republic into place. For those who still look for a revolution to be headed by these men will be looking for a long time. A side note, thank you to everyone for sharing their comments, Afshin and whereismyvote have shown they have a great deal of knowledge on the subject.
Excllent post.
I would never count out His Eminnece, Dr. Rafsanjani. He is a consumate businessman and astute politician. One must also havethe ken and whrewithall to understand that he is a devout Islamic leader.
He has staying power and will be a key force in the fall when Iran's new revolution moves forward into its anti-deluvian phase.
Iran is a sensitive sophisticated and leading country. I am not endorsing nor criticising its people ,politics or social structure. With two millenium of patient(and like all nations violent historical upheavels) continuing history of national identity and cohesion-- this is a nation deserving of respect. Dr. Rafsanjani is a part of that forward momentum.
Grant
Where and when did Rafsanjani get this Doctorate you reference? Last count he was not a Dr. Please be careful with the titles you bestow on this eminence.
Also I like to remind you that Your Dr. so eloquently said that 95% of all work done in an Islamic Republic is nothing to do with Islam. His devotion to Islam stops at his attempts to legalize prostitution and vice.
As a longtime follower of Iranian politics, as a matter of personal interest, I agree with those who say Rafsanjani is far from a spent force. My read of the situation is that he doesn't have the votes to remove the Supreme Leader and he isn't going to even try --- because to do so would immediately align forces against him. Even if he could somehow get the votes together, his move would inevitably be violently resisted by the Revolutionary Guard so I think he's decided to hold his fire there. However, there is a long game to be played here... who replaces the Supreme Leader. Khamenei has cancer, and may die soon --- if Rafsanjani can hold on long enough to retain influence in the Assembly of Experts, he may well be influential yet again in choosing the *next* Supreme Leader. He is probably thinking of the Montazeri fiasco --- had Montazeri been a more canny politician, if he had held his tongue and played the game a bit better, he may well have succeeded Khomeini and the history of Iran would have significantly changed. Rafsanjani may well be thinking about this lesson --- if he can hold on, retain credibility, and outlive Khamenei, he might be able to outflank the far right and install some sort of moderate conservative in the position of Supreme Leader --- someone who might actually follow the constitution and mandate fair elections in the future.
Another element of the long game here is the Larijani brothers. They're clearly members of the right wing coalition in Iran, yet they have also been critical of the abuses of the security establishment. The fact that one of the Larijanis was just appointed head of the judiciary is a clear victory, I believe, for Rafsanjani and the pragmatic conservatives. What if one of the Larijanis runs for President in the next election? Someone like that may well be able to gain enough support within the Guardian Council to be allowed to run AND allowed to win. The Larijanis are pretty hard line so this might not be a huge improvement on Ahmadinejad, but it might be a return to a slightly more pragmatic Iran.
Re. Khamenei's 'terminal' cancer- I have heard this repeated (like rumours of his severe depression and drug addiction), but there just is no evidence.
Some say he has lung cancer- which is impossible given his lack of coughing throughout his speeches. Some say he has leukemia...which again would be far more debilitating.
What exactly has he got and how do you know?
ChrisE
Khamanei does have lung cancer, and was heavily treated for it. He has had from medical sources and doctors in Rezai hospital repeated treatment for MRI etc. to treat the lung cancer that is in remission. He gave up his smoking as a result of this. He was a constant pipe smoker before.
His depression is a well documented fact that is evident from the past, when he made regular TV appearances. It was partially attributed to his heavy usage of opium and pain killers post injury to his arm. The explosion that took out part of his lung and right arm caused major phantom pain that was treated for a while with pain killers. Side effect was his deep depressions.
The fact that he is alive and I give him 10 more years to live is attributed to the circle of Dr.'s that surround him and treat his every ailment. You have good Dr.'s in Iran. Does not mean the old fart is not sick